Balta1701

QUOTE(fathom @ May 29, 2007 -> 04:20 PM) They develop a few good relivers every couple of years. I can't think of the last guy who contributed to our bullpen that was from within. They also have Nathan sitting at the back end who was acquired via trade, and 1 reliever who has some, let's say, chemical enhancements, helping out. They also have a former Sox castaway in there in Guerrier. Hopefully Logan winds up fitting the bill pretty soon.

QUOTE(BearSox @ May 29, 2007 -> 04:13 PM) Oh, I know, but for a while there it seemed to be a bad trade because of how bad Koch pitched, but Koch likely sucked because of that mysterious disease he had http://www.ktvu.com/news/9264350/detail.html I dunno, I totally understand Mr. Koch's condition...but i'm still uncertain as to how exactly that leads ot you losing 7-8 mph off your fastball in 1 summer.

QUOTE(BearSox @ May 29, 2007 -> 04:04 PM) Another questionable one was Foulke for Cotts and Koch trade. There were some other minor prospects who sucked in that deal also. I dunno, we lost 1 year of Foulke before he hit FA right? Yes, Koch sucked. But Cotts had a dominant 05 to help us win a ring and has been turned into another hard thrower who may well wind up being another good releiver.

Well, if you're coming back to save a pitching staff, you might as well start against the weakest offense you can find, right?

QUOTE(BearSox @ May 29, 2007 -> 04:00 PM) Todd Ritchie and Kip Wells for Todd Ritchie Um...man, that is the single most 1-sided deal ever.

QUOTE(TitoMB345 @ May 29, 2007 -> 03:15 PM) I know I'll probably take a lot of flack for this, but Sammy Sosa to the Cubs for George Bell. Bell sucked, while Sosa... well, you all know the story. I understand what you're saying on paper...but I will add...at least we kept our souls.

So, here's my whole take: The whole reason why you would want to get Kobe Bryant is because you want to bundle him with the pieces you already have. It doesn't do you much good to put a lineup of Bryant, Duhon, Sweetney, Khryapa, Wallace out there, because we've already seen what that does in L.A. If you can't pair Kobe with Deng, Wallace, and probably Hinrich, then the motivation for this deal is pretty low, because all you're doing is setting up exactly the situation LA is in now: 1 great star who puts you in the playoffs if he's healthy but who isn't good enough to win the whole thing but is also too good for you to get a great draft pick. The only way this type of deal makes sense either for Kobe or for the Bulls is for the deal to not make sense for the Lakers. In other words, it winds up being 1 guy, like Hinrich, thrown in with maybe Nocioni, to cover the salary. Then the Bulls hold on to Deng, Wallace, and probably a TT or something like that and that looks like a championship lineup, especially if you can draft a point guard. The only way this type of deal happens is if Kobe requests it and the Lakers take back only enough to match the salaries. Because for equal talent, it basically takes the whole Bulls starting lineup...which is of course why it's so difficult to trade a superstar.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ May 29, 2007 -> 09:56 AM) Nuke: You're right. We could have won this war pretty easily, and we could have even made the right case to get into Iraq in the first place. But as the execution of this war shows, priorities have been in wrong places since day one of planning. Sadly, I think this is actually incorrect. I think that the idea of launching a humanitiarian war in the middle of this powderkeg of a region was bound to wind up this way. No matter what we did, eventually, there were going to be people out of work and unhappy about it who decided to turn to violence, and eventually it was going to get out of control no matter what happened, IMO. You just can not expect the United States Army to be greeted as liberators and worshipped as freedom-givers in the middle east these days, and that is one of the key flaws. Of course, I can't prove that, and neither can anyone else, because we only have the scenario which actually played out. But I can add that no matter what, it could have and probably should have been pretty obvious that even if this war was a great idea on paper, the people who would be running it were not at all the sort of people who should be trusted with something of this magnitude.

Who in the world is Ron Mexico?

Actually saw a guy in the mall in Arcadia, CA a few weeks ago wearing a #8 Jackson White Sox Jersey. In excellent shape. Went up to him and complimented him on that one.

Be better than them John

So, seriously, some of those calls were iffy throughout the first 8 minutes of the 4th...but that T that they called on Fisher where Fisher bumped Ginobili slightly after a basket and Ginobili flopped (And my God no one in their right mind could say that was anything but a flop) was just outrageous. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ May 28, 2007 -> 10:28 PM) The guy projects to be a fantastic defensive player and the question is obviously whether you could get him to do anything at all offensively (a big if). But for people to question his athletism is inaccurate, imo, and in the end if the scoring big are gone I at least want the Bulls to find another athlete up front. I agree with you roughly 1/2 of the way on this post. Yes, Noah is a pretty darn good athlete, and he has a chance to develop into an excellent interior player because of his athleticism. But IMO, the Bulls already have one guy like that, in Tyrus, and I think Tyrus is a much better candidate to develop into a dominant both-sides-of-the-court player than Noah, and that's my main reason for not wanting Noah; he seems like a lesser version of doubleT. And on top of this point...lets say that all of the other potentially good options are gone. Oden, Durant, Hawes, Wright, Horford, Yi. That would virtually guarantee that there would be other talent on the board that the Bulls could use; even if a big man isn't directly available, it could make things much easier for the Bulls if they wanted to move Gordon or Hinrich to fill that hole. Brewer or Conley would probably have to be sitting there for all of the better options to have moved on, at which point the Bulls say Screw it, take the best player available, and then try to swing either Gordon or whoever we just drafted for the big man we so desperately need.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ May 27, 2007 -> 06:36 PM) Owens is playing well. With Pablo going down, and Podsednik down, I think it may well be time to give Jerry a month to see if he can hit some MLB pitching.

Good game, Boone.

QUOTE(spiderman @ May 24, 2007 -> 06:44 PM) Why is Edwards a better candidate than in 2004 when he didn't get the nomination, and then lost as VP ? Hasn't he been out of government since, thus negating the 'more experience' needed' argument ? Because he's the only one who isn't making a complete arse of himself on the war funding.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 24, 2007 -> 06:37 PM) Point 3. It's NOT THESE people. Let me tell you something. Billy Boy Clinton had the same hard-on for Saddam as BushCo did, but he knew it was suicide politically to do any more then lob missles in there to look like he was tough. It cracks my ass up to hear all you lefties say we need to help in Darfur, and we needed to help in Bosnia for the "benefit of the people", but Saddam, who had killed 1,000,000 of his own people, well, NOOOOOO ... THAT'S DIFFERENT! Whatever. It gets tiresome to see the same old retread about how the Democrats are the beautiful party and they just want what's best for America... yea, what's best if they control government and we become a socialist nation. It's all good then. So if I opposed the action related to the Kosovar Civil War as well, which I in fact did (I had a couple of Serbian friends in High School and realized that I couldn't win an argument with them over the issue when their response was "why does my family have to be put at risk because of this?), and am very skeptical about the whole concept of humanitarian "War" (as opposed to some sort of intervention to stop a war, which might be the reality in Darfur - something that could be achieved by the appearance rather than the application of force), does that leave me able to make my point? I simply don't think you can improve the world by killing a few hundred thousand people to free people, especially if those folks don't want it. QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 24, 2007 -> 06:37 PM) Point 1. You are flat out wrong. Question: do you want the Iraq war to end? 95% say yes! WOOOOOOOOOOT! DEMS WIN!... GMAB. Question: do you think we should withdrawl immediately from Iraq? That's 50%, AT BEST, and most of the numbers I see are usually about 35% WHEN AN EQUAL # OF PEOPLE ARE ASKED OF EQUAL POLITICAL BACKGROUND, not a bunch of Democrats. That leaves out the 1 other point though...Yes, 35% say there should be an immediate withdrawal. But another 35-40% beyond that say that well maybe there shouldn't be an immediate withdrawal, but there should be firm benchmarks set or an official timeline for when we're withdrawing. Hell, I'll even cite the Fox News poll that says that. Only like 25% of this country wants this war to continue until January 20, 2009/forever, as is currently in the law. And if you simply ask the "Favor/oppose" question, it's 60-65% opposed. This country doesn't want this thing any more. The only question is what the best way out is; immediate withdrawal or something phased with more timelines.

GOP folks...just like to say...Thanks. Really appreciate your help on this one.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ May 24, 2007 -> 03:21 PM) With Hibbert gone, is Hawes going to fall to the Bulls? And is he your man? Honestly, I agree with you on the need of the big man. I think I'd rather see the Bulls not make a pick at all and see if they can get Gasol away from Memphis. Unfortunately, that's going to be unbelievably difficult with the contracts. IMO, it takes either Hinrich or Wallace to pull it off. There are ways around that (Sign and Trade with Noc/PJ, Duhon, Khryapa, etc), but nothing that would really interest the Grizz. The Grizz still get to team Gasol with Horford or Yi or whoever they wind up picking, and that's a pretty good place to start from.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ May 24, 2007 -> 09:58 AM) they want to do some more polling before they decide what their public stance will be. And its' been another 24 hours, and neither Obama or Hillarity have come out with a position on this yet. That's it, f*** these people. I'm back to undecided and leaning Edwards until they get their act together. This is total B.S. on their part. This is the easiest decision they should ever have to make.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 24, 2007 -> 04:42 AM) And this is exactly what the f*** is wrong with you people. It's AMERICA's war, like it or not. This s*** pisses me off and it shows how f***ing shallow your ilk really is. It's about power, not ideas, and it's sick. Most of these f***tard Dems voted FOR the war, remember? And f*** off saying "Bush lied"... they ALL had the same intelligence. I'm sick and goddamn tired of this attitude. It's fine to support (or not support) a policy, but your true feelings are VERY loud in this post. INVESTIGATIONS!!!! WOOOT! NO REAL SOLUTIONS!!!! REMEMBER TO BLAME REPUBLICANS!!!! Please. So, sadly, no, to my eyes, this is not America's war. Not in the least, certainly not these days. America has long since decided it doesn't want this war any more. Only a small minority, which just happens to control the White House and a large chunk of the media, still want this war to go on. Every recent piece of data says that America doesn't want this war to go on any more. And beyond that, America was never sold on this fight. America was sold on a war that we actually won; a brief, few week campaign to overthrow Saddam, regardless of the reason. America was not sold a nearly 6 year guerrilla war. America was never asked to plan for that war, America was never asked if it wanted that war. The few of us who said you couldn't have one without the other were cast aside and ignored. And secondly, you know why I think we need to make clear who's fault this is? Because the biggest chunk of those who think this war is the greatest idea ever are the ones who have the power right now. What it is going to take for this debacle to be ended is for those specific people to no longer have power at all. Which means, quite simply, the people who think we need Double-Gitmo and more and more troops in Iraq until Jesus returns must lose. Whether or not its the idiotic Dems in Congress who went along with the war who allowed it to happen or who are allowing it to continue...the dying is not going to stop until these people are out of power. End of story.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ May 24, 2007 -> 11:02 AM) If either of Horford or Brewer happen to fall to nine, I'd hate to see the Bulls pass. Horford's probably the top non-Oden/Durant guy I only pray would drop to the Bulls.

Even still, that whole filibuster thing gets you. Of course, only cowardly traitors would ever use that for anything. Damn obstructionists. Anywho, hopefully the Dems are smart enough to keep up the investigations and make this look more and more like the Republican's war that it is until Nov., 08, and we can elect someone who will put a stop to this disaster. But anyway, placed my first ever call to a Congressman's office today on this.

QUOTE(Wedge @ May 23, 2007 -> 12:56 PM) What about the Chinese dude? SI has the bulls taking him in at least 1 mock draft.

QUOTE(caulfield12 @ May 23, 2007 -> 02:50 PM) I think we're more likely at this point to lose to a fellow AL Central competitor, rather than the Yankees. The Yankees are doing all they can to make sure you're correct.

Seriously, for the other campaigns, there is no excuse for why Edwards is always first out of the gate with these statements. This one is so incredibly obvious that campaigns should have been on it last night.