Felix

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Apr 2, 2006 -> 12:33 AM) Since his extension doesn't start until 2007, doesn't that mean that the Sox can trade Contreras at any point during this season? Thats what I wasn't sure about, so I don't really know.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 11:52 PM) Even if Contreras isnt as good as last season.... I think he can keep his era in the high 3's low 4's which would give him still good trade value going into the off-season. He has a no-trade clause for the first year of his contract, meaning that unless he waives it, he cannot be traded until the end of 2007 (I believe at least).

Nice job to whoever made the banner for tomorrow nights game

In that White Sox article, RumorMonger (the owner of the site?) posted 'Lidge for Buehrle?". Anyone still doubt he's a moron?

QUOTE(Soxpranos @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 07:59 PM) Numbers lie.. its when you get them key hits or outs. Some guys just perform under pressure more than others. And this might be true (or false, but I won't argue it right now), but his original post said that despite sucking on the road, Blalock still had good overall numbers last year. Whether or not they lie is a different question, but they were not good overall numbers.

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 07:34 PM) 25 homers and 90 plus RBI as a 25 year old third baseman. Those are good numbers. He's young but since he doesn't have a mullet he is not thought of well here. Watch Blalock surprise many of you. Its moot now that it seems that KW will just deal one of the starters for a reliever So you are saying he had good power numbers, not good overall numbers (like your first post said). Good power numbers != good overall numbers.

QUOTE(Steff @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 06:27 PM) Very cool. I hope they are sure that Aaron is coming back Tuesday. The cell might be louder tomorrow and Tuesday then it was during the playoffs. It better be.. or else I'm going to be mad at all of you that are going. Scream your hearts out. If you lose your voice, you've done a good job.

QUOTE(robinventura23 @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 05:13 PM) I'll be on my couch with my Buehrle jersey on and my stereo jacked up. This is going to be great!! Same here, but with my Rowand jersey

The answer to the poll is obviously not enough

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 02:57 PM) How old is Blalock? Nobody ever talks about this. He's only 25. He still put up good numbers overall last year Uh.. which Blalock are we talking about? Hank Blalock, I'm assuming thats who, hit .263/.318/.431 last year, and if those are good numbers, then I'm a monkey's uncle.

QUOTE(Soxpranos @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) Dont want to start a Rowand thread like last year.. look what it got him.. a Philly uniform.. anyone can get dealt. Part of a business, you need to look at it that way. Its about winning now, not later... Well, personally (and I'm likely the only one), I think that McCarthy gives us a better chance than Contreras does at winning now.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:44 PM) Hmm... this seems odd: I assume the 'will make $8 million in 2005' is just a typo, but I'm still skeptical. Then again, I think -- they wouldn't f*** around with something like a contract extension, would they? I believe they mean "will make $8 million in 2006" Otherwise, that doesn't make any sense at all

QUOTE(Soxpranos @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:41 PM) 2 starts? come on man.. i like McCarthy also.. but beating Boston and the other quality start , doesnt make him the next Maddux. Hopefully for us he makes your prophecy come true. His second half ERA (when he came back up from AAA after fixing his delivery IIRC) was something along the lines of 1.69. Now, without looking at the numbers, I believe that was better than what Contreras did in the second half of last year, yet everyone here seems to think Contreras is a Cy Young candidate.

Look at the source you have there. Take it with a grain of salt..

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:29 PM) I say there's no way in hell we move McCarthey, he's about 30 years younger than Contreras and has a couple years yet until he even hits arbitration. You don't just trade a player as awesome as McCarthy, he's the total package, ability, cost and youth. Thats basically what I'm thinking, and I'm really hoping KW thinks the same.

QUOTE(Soxpranos @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:21 PM) its a done deal http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/transactions I think WhiteSox.com would know more than ESPN.com. My guess is that ESPN just heard it on the Score, so put it up there. We'll see though. Nope, its there on WhiteSox.com. http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb...t=.jsp&c_id=cws

Steve Buscemi... easily. Soft or hard cheese doodles

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 12:17 PM) Anyone else having as my trouble as I am confirming this deal? I haven't found anything anywhere, so my suspicions are rising.

If this is real, I absolutely the deal, unless he's traded.

Jeopardy Godfather or Godfather 2?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 08:41 AM) but I think it's safe to say that no team has ever had a 5 man rotation with every guy going 200+ innings, let alone 200+ innings with everybody having an ERA under 4. I think its safe to say you won't see that happen this year either.

I was tired of using black & white in every sig that I make, so I went out on a limb and tried using green. I'm not the biggest fan of it, but there's a reason why I don't critique my own work. Thoughts? Opinions? Please share

QUOTE(whitesoxin' @ Mar 31, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) but Cotts, Politee, B-Mac, and Jenks should be just as good as last year if not better. Not mentioning Cotts, BMac, and Jenks, why should Politte be just as good, if not better? He's 32 years old and had a career year last year, posting an ERA 205 points below his career average, and 160 points lower than he had ever posted in a full year. If anything, his numbers are going to decrease considerably, and its highly unlikely that he posts a 2.01 ERA and 0.94 WHIP again.

QUOTE(iWiN4PreP @ Mar 31, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) lol. Indians second longest ws drought to the cubs? Right? or am I wrong:? Correct: Last World Series win Number of Year Years Chicago Cubs 1908 97 Cleveland Indians 1948 57 San Francisco Giants 1954 51 Texas Rangers NEVER 45 Houston Astros NEVER 44 Milwaukee Brewers NEVER 37 San Diego Padres NEVER 37 Washington Nationals NEVER 37 Seattle Mariners NEVER 29 Pittsburgh Pirates 1979 26 Philadelphia Phillies 1980 25 St. Louis Cardinals 1982 23 Baltimore Orioles 1983 22 Detroit Tigers 1984 21 Kansas City Royals 1985 20 New York Mets 1986 19 Los Angeles Dodgers 1988 17 Oakland Athletics 1989 16 Cincinnati Reds 1990 15 Minnesota Twins 1991 14 Colorado Rockies NEVER 13 Toronto Blue Jays 1993 12 Atlanta Braves 1995 10 Tampa Bay Devil Rays NEVER 8 New York Yankees 2000 5 Arizona Diamondbacks 2001 4 Los Angeles Angels 2002 3 Florida Marlins 2003 2 Boston Red Sox 2004 1 Chicago White Sox 2005 0

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2006 -> 08:26 PM) The question is...when were the new photos taken? I don't want to see Thornton in a Mariners uniform all year. Around March 12th (SSH was right in this post), but people like Thornton have been photoshopped by MLB.com (I assume at least) so they have the right jerseys on.