IlliniKrush

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 05:15 PM) I'll take your money too, if you are up for it. No s*** they won't hit .230, pretty sure no team did that last year, but which guys are going to get THAT much better, to the point at which the Sox will actually compete? Throw some numbers out there for actual hitters, since they will all get so much better, and Steve and I will be sure to bet on those.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 05:12 PM) You do realize that a team stat is the combination of individual stats, right? No, had no idea. He asked to give specific examples of where guys should improve, or even regress. So, how does that stat get better? Simply saying OMG the Sox are great everyone will improve probably doesn't make it likely. Right, my stalker?

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 04:53 PM) So, am I to believe you think Alex Rios with a .984 OPS is normal? Alexei Ramirez hitting .306 is normal? They are above expectations. Should we expect more from De Aza? His OPS is right in line with last season. Adam Dunn? He's proven he can do this for an entire season. Dayan Viciedo? There's zero patience there. He and the great career-backup Jeff Keppinger have yet to draw a walk this season. Keppinger should hit a bit better, but he's no difference maker. Gordon Beckham? Well, he's injured but was actually hitting .300. Tyler Flowers? Expecting anything more than he's given so far (.229 average, .794 OPS) would be completely asinine. Who haven't we covered yet? Gillaspie? He's hitting .300. Paulie? He's 37 - but I guess slight improvement could be expected. So, really - tell me why I am wrong on anyone above. Show me where I should expect improvement in this God-awful offense while, of course, expecting Rios/Ramirez to come back down a bit? Great post. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 05:01 PM) Yes, all of them should improve, and in some cases drastically. The team is not going to hit .230 for the season, and .170 with RISP for the season. Expecting that is the definition of asinine. Aaaand didn't address any of it, used a simple team stat when we need to talk about each individual that comprises said stat.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 03:04 PM) There's just absolutely no reason for Rios or Robin to have him running there. But honestly, who cares, every loss is a step closer to a difference-making draft pick. Fans don't care about difference-making draft picks!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 01:55 PM) Just use your head. Both runners would have been moving if a steal was called, unless Konerko missed the sign. Konerko could have got a huge lead and jump. If there ever was a time he could have easily made it to second, that would be the time, and with a LH hitter up, the throw will almost always go to 3rd. The odds greatly favor Rios either misreading a sign or making the attempt on his own. But you want to complain about the manager, so you ignore logic. Wow, baseball stupidity here. No, Konerko wouldn't have been moving as it's a guaranteed out, throw would have went to 2nd base. With 2 outs, you're taking the guaranteed out. The odds are not with him missing a sign, as during the course of a baseball game, the vast majority of things happen because a sign was on. So the burden of proof lies elsewhere.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 12:28 PM) I am just done being upset over it. Nobody is forcing his hand, nobody can make him do it, at this point I am just numb to it. God can!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 12:17 PM) No it's not completely stupid. Robin Ventura knows more about baseball than you or me. To think he would send Rios in that situation is the stupid thing. The runner on first didn't move. I don't know, maybe they have a signal for the 3rd base coach that says, runner on 2nd, you steal, runner on first, hold your ground. It's absolutely stupid to assume there's a greater possibility he went on his own/missed a sign than being told to steal. Of course it's stupid to send him there, doesn't mean he didn't do it. We actually have to assume he was sent until we hear otherwise, as the manager makes the call on those things. Great move there, Dick. RV knows more about baseball! OK, can't question anything ever. Let's close down the message board. Here's the problem, that doesn't mean because you played the game you make the right move every time. He proved that last year on numerous occasions. Also, wasn't he runner on first yesterday Konerko? No s*** he didn't run, he would have been thrown out lefthanded. Use your head before you talk about the runner on first not moving.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 12:09 PM) Rose still sitting at this point makes most a little perplexed, but let's face it, if he comes back next season at 100%, all will be forgiven, and everyone will say he did the right thing, the team wasn't going anywhere anyway, blah, blah blah.... False. To get back to 100% he needs to play in games, and he's refusing to do that even though he's cleared to play - not only cleared, it's recommended as the next step in the process by doctors. Everyone will remember this no matter what. You can't say "oh he's 100% now, good thing he took last year off." Makes no difference. Could have won something this year, but also would be closer to 100% next year had he played this year. Start the process.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 11:44 AM) So it is beyond the realm of possibility that Rios missed a sign or was running on his own. The fact is, it is far more likely than Robin having him steal. It's possible, but to say it's more likely that's what happened than Ventura sending him is completely stupid. Even if it was just a green light for Rios to go if he felt it, that would be stupid enough.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 11:38 AM) Just like that an update townhouse opens up right down the street from me in a development I have been eyeing for awhile. Awesome. The one on Aberdeen?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 10:33 AM) Are you sure he called for Rios to steal? Is Robin Ventura the manager?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 10:27 AM) Silence at first. I honestly have another offer out to another place currently though theirs is my first choice. I told my realtor if they want the offer back its going to be at a lower price point. I really respect people who are honest in business. When I negotiate I am very honest and forthcoming and try to put my cards on the table. This agent could have done that and I am sure gotten this done faster. Because they lied and tried to play the game I have no qualms in being a total dick back. I agree

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 10:17 AM) Guess who came back to me wanting to negotiate again? LOL In the post above you said you'd lower your offer...so what's your move now?

It's possible to evaluate a manager whether the team is good, bad, or somewhere in the middle. Yesterday's Rios steal is a great example. That isn't on Dunn for sucking.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 09:46 AM) The problem is once you lose those fans, it makes it harder to keep any existing crop of players you can develop, because those revenues aren't there anymore. It doesn't do any good to develop the next Frank Thomas, if you have to trade him away to someone who can afford to pay him. We see that all of the time in baseball, with any number of teams littering the sidelines as failed rebuilds who instead supply players to the teams who do have fans. Again, I have yet to see any really good examples of a full rebuild actually resulting in a World Series win, in any short amount of time (even say five years). The closest example I can really see would be Tampa Bay. But that wasn't a few years worth of a rebuild. That was a period of time from 1998 to 2007 where their highest win total was 70 wins. Most of these projects end up as abject failures. Again, you can debate about how to rebuild, or whatever you want to call it, all you want. I don't know if it's a true rebuild, but I'm definitely in favor of trading pieces that won't be here next time you actually win anything of significance. None of us know exactly what will work. The point is that, if something comes up where everyone in the front office feels great about doing it, that it will bring the Sox closer to a championship, they shouldn't be prevented from doing it because someone brings up "well in the short term, it's going to result in less fans." The whole treading water thing is silly. If trading Peavy can get you pieces that will help in the future if you don't think you'll win this year or next, it shouldn't be "well it will be hard to draw fans this August if we show the fan base we gave up etc."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 09:35 AM) Yes, misses the point exactly. What happened to the fan base last time they blew the team up? How long did it take to get the fan base back after that? Its easy to say blow it up and start over, like this is OOTP or something. Reality of that working differs from franchise to franchise. The Cubs can do it because they have a loyal fanbase who will deal with that. The Sox don't. The Sox fans didn't even support a team that was in first place for almost the entire season last year. If they sell off, they will lose some fans for good. You can debate about how to do a rebuild all you want, the point is that you have to get a winning ballclub out there. If that results in a few down years, but you have a plan in place that will work, you do it. Simply trying to tread water and be afraid to do something that in your office you believe will result in winning a world series is the wrong approach. There are plenty of Cubs fans not going to games right now, which is fine, when the Cubs are competing they'll all be back and they'll make up for that revenue anyway. There are plenty of Sox fans who already aren't going, and it will just continue to decline each time they miss the playoffs. The fans they "lose for good" will be back once they are in the playoffs or world series, we all know that. Or they are a first place team that for whatever reason, the fans believe in and can finish the job.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 09:20 AM) Your revenue streams are absolutely a consideration for how to build your team. It is a fairytale land to think otherwise. Missed the point, unsurprisingly. The attitude is develop a team that wins the world series or at least gets to the playoffs consistently. That's how you get a s*** ton of money coming in. That surpasses being "OK" for a period of years just to hope to keep a few fans coming. After a while, throwing a team out there that can maybe stay competitive and win 80 games will erode the fan base. Hell, look at the attendance and attitude among fans right now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 21, 2013 -> 06:56 PM) What the Cubs do is irrelevant, because the Sox demographics are completely different. The Sox don't have as loyal of a fanbase where they can do a complete rebuild and still have any fans around. It doesn't matter what the demographics are for the Sox and the Cubs. It's about what results in a winning ball club and a World Series. If, in the Sox offices, they think tearing down and developing is the best way to do it, then you do it, period. This isn't about keeping just enough fans coming to the park. That can't be the mindset in the front office. QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 21, 2013 -> 07:37 PM) Well no, it's not the right way to do things, at least not anymore. The new CBA has made traditional rebuilding much more difficult and risky. Also, I love how some people are actually envious of the Cubs' situation. Go talk to Cubs fans and see how excited they are about where their organization currently stands. Having zero chance to win at the beginning of a season sucks balls and so does realizing that will be the case for the next three or four seasons if not even more. Most Cubs fans were on board for Theo's full rebuilding at first, but after seeing the sacrifices required first hand most are already tired of it and it's only been two years. This would be no different for White Sox fans. What? Cubs fans, at least the smart ones, do feel a lot better now than they have in recent years. They realize it will take some time, but at least there's hope. They have new ownership, they have a plan for a rebuild. They feel better now than they have in a while. If they are out of patience than they are dumb. You simply can't have a chance to win every year with what they took over.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 21, 2013 -> 05:04 PM) Home run. The rope has been extended Yup, at least another 20+ hit less at bats.

QUOTE (thedoctor @ Apr 21, 2013 -> 06:25 PM) put me in the camp of not basing plans on what the cubs are doing. Cubs are absolutely doing it the right way. Whether it works or not who knows, but that's the way to do it. Simply discrediting it because it's the Cubs is silly, plus it's all new management anyway.

Having Rios steal 3rd base with 1 out and 2 strikes on Adam Dunn today...not sure where he comes up with that.

Few things: I'm very surprised that the man that lived in that house walked all the way to the boat, lifted the cover, and took a look to see if he was in there. There was blood, possibly clothing(?), a door open to the shed(?), and a string cut off the tarp...that would have been enough for me to go back inside and call police and be 99% sure it was related to him, even if he wasn't there. Instead he got out a ladder and looked? Wow. They didn't really use heat sensing technology to "find" him in the boat. They used it to confirm he was in the boat. They knew he was in the boat because of said neighbor. Had they, out of the blue, found him using that in the boat, it would have been a crazy find. Surprised they let the guy go after just letting him get cash out of the ATM(s). If that guy left his phone in the car on purpose, what a brilliant move. Couldn't imagine being that guy. Get carjacked, and then they tell you to get back in the car with them, with no idea what's about to happen. I wonder where he was the whole night/morning/afternoon...this boat was just outside the perimeter so apparently wasn't searched earlier, was it possible he was there a good part of the day? Didn't they say someone else saw blood in a different backyard at some point?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 20, 2013 -> 03:03 PM) Wow this Neil diamond doing his own song is terrible Bad. Yeah, can we at least put a PIP on our game with no song? I don't think that's unreasonable.

You think death is great, I get it. Giving terrorists what they want, not too sure on that one. You keep contradicting yourself. If they wanted death, they could have have chosen a suicide bomb to begin with. Also, "eventually he'll die so the families will get what they want." Are you kidding me with this? Wait, everyone dies? No s***. Some of them don't want to wait for the natural death.

You can take the hell factor out of this, we don't have to make it religious, that's fine. But, he doesn't deserve to live. He doesn't deserve to think, go outside a cell, eat, etc. He took that away from people on multiple occasions. Dying may be peaceful, but I don't want to take that "risk" either that it's not. Your risk argument is beyond weird, and it's all based on opinion. One's not more "risky" than the other one. It's all a matter of what you think. If faced with this, you'd rather die I guess. That's fine. For all we know he'd rather live than die. Who knows. He knew what road this was going down, if he didn't want that he could have killed himself anyway. Think about it from the families' perspective (those who lost people), do you think they want him alive? I'm not so sure all of them would. "Death is just falling asleep and never waking up." You make it sound so simple, but you're still f***ing dead. You're about suffering, other people are about game over. You can't simply say confinement is worse than death, there's nothing that can prove that. We can't hear from the other side.