Balta1701

Since so many people seem to complain when Ozzie shuffles his lineup around constantly, I'm pretty sure that since we won our first game of the season in game 3 against the Indians, the only time Ozzie has changed the starting lineup at all has been to give AJ a day off on Saturday. This looks like the 4th out of the last 5 games with an identical starting lineup.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 11:05 AM) The entire montage needs to stay as is. They already tried once to replace Thunderstruck and it lasted like a few games. Brooks realizes what we like as fans. The year they tried to change it was 2005. I think they should change it for the first game or two every year. Then change back after everyone gets pissed. Kinda like the New Coke/Coca Cola classic switch.

The Sox actually had a chance to sign Jackie Robinson several years before the Dodgers did, but passed on the opportunity.

QUOTE(lostfan @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 12:22 PM) "It is unfortunate that so many opponents of the surge still refuse to acknowledge the gains we have achieved in Iraq. " It is also unfortunate that those backing the surge are selling it as the single reason for the drop in violence levels in Iraq and completely ignoring other strategic gains/losses. And that, in a nutshell, I think is a perfect example of one of, if not the biggest reason why this war was a debacle from the start and still is. If you're doing something risky, like fighting a war, you should try to put yourself in a position where if things don't work out well, you're not totally screwed. This is the reason why the Pentagon probably has hard drives filled with warplans for everything from a war with China to what happens if hostages are taken by Zimbabwe. Hope for the best, but plan for the worst. But because of the way we got in to this war, and because the people who were the biggest cheerleaders for it have been more motivated by trying to get political gains out of it, we have planned for the best, and ignored the worst because it wasn't really happening. So, for the people loving this war, the surge is great. There's nothing else risky going on that we should worry about, and we can stay there the next 100 years and stabilize the region. There's no risk in having Iran basically controling the situation to the point that they can call a cease fire, there's no risk in 30% of Iraqi units failing to perform, there's no risk in the de-baathification law they cite having been written by the Shi'ites and strongly opposed by the Sunnis (the group it's supposed to help!), there's no risk in the provincial elections handing control of the country to Sadr, no risk at all. Everything's groovy, it's totally ok to have 800 or so bodies turning up a month because that's lower than the 2000 that were showing up a year ago, now vote for me and give me money.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 10:38 AM) Do we really know that Toby Hall is ineffective? Are you saying that his shoulder is affecting his offense and defense so far...in the one game that he has played this season? Yes, it definitely affected him at the end of last season (based off his career up to that point) but I don't know that you can say he is hurt this year. Again, I wouldn't fault the organization if they had cut him because they felt his shoulder wasn't okay but at this point, going on Toby's word, I like the idea of having a decent right-handed hitting catcher that hits lefties fairly well backing up AJ. No, we don't know for sure yet. But what we do know pretty well is he looked bad in ST, and he looked bad in game 1, and he looked bad last year. The fact is, I think we have to consider him "on notice". Don't cut him yet. Don't replace him yet. But if he's hitting sub .200 in his role come late May/early June, then that position has to be changed. Last year, we put ourselves in a position early in the season where AJ was basically starting every game because Gustavo Molina was our backup and he couldn't do anything. It didn't matter last year because the team sucked. But if we're looking at having a shot at this division, we don't want ourselves to be in a position where our 2 options are a guy who can't hit or playing our catcher every day and wearing him down to the point he'll break down come September/October. Toby's got to earn his playing time.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) Not sure we can really deduce anything about Hall from the time we have seen him in a Whitesox uniform. He has played 1 game so far this year and even without a hit from him, we won the game with decent pitching and more importantly rested AJ. Hall is a back-up catcher that may in all likelihood play a max of 40-45 games this year (barring an injury to AJ). He was hurt in ST last year and is now just recovering. He has hit left handed pitching fairly well in his career and is not a liability defensively. If AJ is tearing the cover off the ball as he has been, no need to play Hall against lefties, other than the occasional rest for AJ. I agree with Ozzie that he has to be able to count on Toby to be ready and not injured throughout the season and only he and the the team know best on that front. If he is healthy and he can spell AJ from time to time, great. But I'm not ready to write him off because he was hurt last year and didn't get a hit in his 1 game. Its not like he's blocking Joe Mauer in our minors or something... In 06, we were angry enough about our backup catcher to make a trade to try to fill that position in June. Hall will, as you say, likely play 40-45 games. If his shoulder is so bad that he provides very little on defense, and also provides very little on offense, then that creates a lot of problems for this team. In the other thread, people gave the ol' shoulder shrug to Uribe, saying that if Uribe continued to struggle but played good defense, he'd be tolerable if other people kept hitting. Well, you can say the same thing about Hall. But the problem is...you can only say that same thing so often, eventually you start needing someone to hit or field or do something. If Hall's shoulder is so bad that he's ineffective with both the bat and with the throw to 2nd, then we have to look at replacing him.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 09:09 AM) There are really 2 issues at hand here. 1) Does the US boycott the opening ceramonies? 2) Does the US boycott the entire Olympics? As for #1, I really don't care if the team walks out in some fruity outfit or not. As for #2, there is no way that the US should ever boycott the Olympic games. Politics and Sports should not mix. I will also disclose some personal issues that make up this decision. A coach of mine qualified for the 1980 Olympics which of course was boycotted. This individual spent hundreds of hours training for many years to qualify for the US team, just to have it taken away from him over a silly political spat. In addition, issue #3 could be that of corporate sponsorship. Doesn't Coke and McDonalds sponsor the Olympics? Well, let's answer these with the perspective of the 80/84 olympics. The U.S. made it's political statement about the Afghan war, but the people who suffered were the athletes. These guys may not care about the issue at all, and it's not their job to do so. They're not there to care about that. Their job is to compete and represent the nation in that fashion. I think boycotting the whole games would be a terrible move. The only reason to do that would be if you were truly worried about safety, either due to the air quality (i.e that Kenyan marathon runner who took himself out for that reason) or the team didn't feel like it would be safe (a-la Munich). In terms of the opening ceremony, I'm a little bit more indifferent. It would certainly get attention and be effective if teams refused to walk out. Is there any punishment for a team doing that? One other potential option that you didn't suggest, one that has in fact been recommended and in fact is what Chancellor Merkel is doing...is to have the President be the one to do the boycott. This, I believe I would be in favor of. The President fills the role of head of state, therefore, everything he does is political. He is not there to compete. His presence or absence at that event will, no matter what, be interpreted as a statement of approval or disapproval. If the U.S. feels strongly about a government oppressing and killing and jailing its people for trying to be free (where have we heard a lot about that recently?) then I think this is a totally appropriate action. Don't punish the athletes for the crimes of another regime. One more thing...what message does it send if China is able to crush dissent in Tibet and the President still receives them warmly while another country, let's Call it Ira(insert letter here) does the same while receiving a cold shoulder?

QUOTE(BearSox @ Apr 6, 2008 -> 04:11 PM) didn't we try that a couple times as well? For about the first month last year he actually was our best hitter. The problem was...he was our best hitter because Thome was on the DL, Dye was hurting and stinking, Crede was hurting and stinking, Konerko and Iguchi and AJ got off to terrible starts, and so on. We were just that bad that the guy hitting .250 with no OPS was our best hitter at

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 08:57 AM) Mackowiak in 2006 as well. And the Widge in 05.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Apr 7, 2008 -> 07:51 AM) I couldnt even watch the video, them dragging that thing out of the water made me feel pretty bad. Such an old creature, probably on its way to a breeding ground I clicked on the link and got a video of a polar bear swimming.

Qa'pla!

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Apr 6, 2008 -> 04:36 PM) That's a plus for her campaign if you ask me. Ok, so with a little bit more detail now, here's the actual press release they released. In other words...he's out...but up, hey, he's still going to be raking in the money from them, his firm is still there, and he still has some sort of role. It's seriously like Rasputin with Penn and the Clintons. DHMI nails it here.

As usual... Give em Jell Javy!

Man it's fun kicking arse on national TV. Nicely done all around. Nicely done Mark, Carlos, Joe, Swish, JD, PK, OC, and on and on and on.

Mark Penn reportedly FINALLY stepping down from the Clinton campaign.

We need one person to take the Tampa Bay Bucs in running a mock draft over at TalkBears. Anyone interested? Please?

I think Rex has the right idea. If a government has done something so genuinely bad that the governor needs to be recalled, usually there's a violation of a bunch of laws somewhere, to the point where people are genuinely pissed, at which point the gov is going to be gone anyway. But if a governor simply isn't liked, even after several years, because he's ineffective or because he's running bad policies out there, the recall is probably more trouble than its worth. I'll certainly throw California in this category, the recall was pretty much an expensive debacle that, while it succeeded, did absolutely nothing to help the state's problems, and probably made them worse.

Well, if Alexei can hit a fastball, here's his shot. I still don't like it either.

Today's national TV and tomorrow's the home opener. I hope we can get an Anderson sighting on Tuesday and Wednesday in order to give Thome and Dye and maybe PK some extra time at DH or so on those days. We're going for a sweep of the Tigers on national TV tonight. We had a lineup that worked the last couple days. Play it again, Ozzie. And this is from an Anderson fan. Pencil him in on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Mark, I say take those cats, skin them, and use their fur to keep hundreds warm. For those who asked...no I don't think we see Anderson or Alexei either today or tomorrow. Today is a national TV game and tomorrow is the home opener. I think we see the same lineup that has won the last 3 games (except no Hall)

I wonder...how long does it take before this losing skid becomes one of those things that starts feeding on itself. Like, if Verlander were to take the loss tomorrow, is that enough to start getting the tigers in to that mode where they expect to lose, where one thing goes wrong and suddenly they panic like they have no idea what to do.

I'd go in to next season with Toby Hall as our starting 3rd baseman if it put Kershaw in our rotation.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Apr 5, 2008 -> 04:22 PM) Lets say June rolls around, Crede is hitting .275 with 12Hr's and playing gold glove defense and has came to the Sox willing to sign an extension. Fields is putting up good numbers in the minors and the Sox biggest weakness is the rotation. A team with pitching to deal comes to the Sox looking at Fields and the Sox are able to get a good mid of the rotation starter (with front of the rotation upside who is young and cheap) for Fields (ie, the deal fills the Sox biggest ML need without making the team older or anything). That is exactly the type of scenario I see going down or at least find possible (I'm hoping Danks/Floyd/Count all kick ass though and that the Sox just have a major luxury). Hell, I'd consider dealing Floyd for a couple top notch prospects if a team like the Dodgers or someone else in the NL looking for a 3B got desperate. On principle you could get me to be willing to deal Fields if all those things happened...but seriously, do you think that even the first contract related clause for Crede is going to happen with his agent? And on top of that, I am struggling to find a team that would be an actual candidate to make the deal you're suggesting. At least a team that wouldn't be making fools of themselves in the process. What teams have spare young pitching? The Dodgers perhaps, especially if Schmidt comes back soon, but the 2 young pitchers they'd be able to move are Billingsly and Kershaw...and while I'd do just about any deal to get Kershaw somehow I don't think they're doing that, and I don't know what to think of Billingsly. The other teams who we thought had pitching but needed bats? The Angels? All their pitchers are hurt. Seattle? They don't have a lot in the way of guys who could step in. The Giants? Why would they give up either of their 2 young pitchers? I just don't see a logical match for this. Not to mention it assumes Boras would take a guy off the FA market.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 5, 2008 -> 04:17 PM) I'll just throw this out there for giggles... Al Gore got defended here, pretty passionately, for making a lot more money off of his causes before, and no one seemed to think it would impair his ability to be impartial in the green movement, dispite his financial interests in these projects... You may simply know this better than me, but from my understanding, an awful lot of Al Gore's current wealth derives from having been a very early investor in The Google. A lot of the money that has come from his climate work, including his Nobel Prize money and matching funds from his family for those funds have gone in to the Alliance for Climate Protection campaign they just launched.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 5, 2008 -> 04:09 PM) If Gavin Floyd and John Danks give us an average outing equiviliant to what even Floyd did today, this team will win 90 games. They don't have to put up MB numbers for this to be a good team. 6 innings and 3 runs will win each of them 12-15 games. Jon Garland made a living of it here. I think Floyd, this is probably about what he'll average for us. Hopefully won't be too many "Get shelled" games in-between though. One thing that I think is worth noting is that there's an old rule of thumb that says you really shouldn't push a pitcher to go more than 25-30 innings more than what he's maxed out at in his career. Danks has pulled about 139 innings each of the past 2 years, so there's a good shot we'll be able to push him to 150-160, but it's probably a mistake to try to push him harder than that this season even if we're closing on the playoffs, because it's a big injury risk. Floyd though, he's positioned to eat some innings this year. He's pulled in 170 and 175 the last 2 years between the minors and the bigs. If he pitches well enough to hang in games, there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to be a 200 inning a year guy this year and for the next several years.