NorthSideSox72

Mmmmm... Memphis ribs. Ah the memories. Autozone is a nice little park.

MacDougal roughed up again. Not a great spring for him.

I believe Ozzie just said yesterday or today that Swisher is the CF on Opening Day. I thought I even saw it quoted on here. So, unless Swisher gets hurt or something, I don't think Ramirez is starting on that day.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 04:08 PM) I wouldn't be surprised, but in all reality, probably at least 80%, probably more, of ball players took steroids at one point or another. 80% or more? I'm thinking its more like a quarter, at most.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 03:48 PM) Obama IA director to head PA campaign Could this be evidence Obama thinks he can WIN Penn? It just means he WANTS to win PA.

QUOTE(shipps @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 01:54 PM) For a team that is looking to make the playoffs this year we are doing a hell of a lot of showcasing players. Well, unlike last year, the team is going into the season with some surplus talent at a few positions.

Just as an interesting note to the subject... it appears a key member of the Bush Administration is in concert with Obama's views on race relations in the US a this time.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 01:48 PM) I'm confused. If Swisher is leading off, it would seem obvious Owens isn't going to play? Or is that just for the DL stint? Either way, why is BA NOT going to be in CF, especially while Owens is on the DL? It makes NO sense to me. Who the hell is going to be the third OF during this time??? My assumption is the OF will be Quentin-Swisher-Dye on Opening Day, but also sometimes Swisher-Anderson-Dye after that. Once Owens returns, I have no idea.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 09:26 AM) "21" taking a beating on Rotten Tomatoes. I enjoyed the book. Looking at the previews, it looks like the took the story and tried to make it a flash-bang action movie. As usual, most of Hollywood's studios seem to think the public prefers brawn over brains.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:42 PM) I see you are more baseball literate than political .................................. Really, I'm just joking with you. I liked that your White Sox post had "substance".

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:15 AM) I'm going with 87 wins. Cleveland wins the division with 91. The AL Cetral beats the hell out of each other all year and no one in the division finishes more than 10 under .500. All 5 teams will be tightly packed throughout the season. The Sox finish 2nd, but 2 games out of the wild card. Well stated, that sounds about right.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:17 PM) More interesting reading: Edited to take chaff that wasn't part of the story. Sounds about right. Listen to his stance on the war. He disagreed with it, but it happened. He wants a stable Iraq, as does everyone else. He's been saying on the trail that its past time for the Iraqis to take over, we can no longer help them militarily, any more than we have. How is this inconsisten?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:13 PM) Kinda like Jeremiah Wright is a trusted and close advisor to Obama. So Wright and Obama are married? If so, perhaps we need to merge this thread with the one about Obama and gay sex.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:11 PM) I clicked on your google link, and in the very first link I clicked on, maybe third on the page, I found this: It seems he wasn't always quite the anti-Iraq war he says he is. Thanks for guiding me to that. No substance. Its certainly true that the Dems feared he was a bit of a hawk, regarding going policy on certain countries. That is not the same as supporting the war in Iraq, which as far as I have seen or heard, he has never done. Watch Clinton speak, or McCain speak, in these soundbytes. They offer no more or less substance.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:08 AM) None of the campaigns have much substance. It's just Obama, despite having basically no experience, claims substance when he doesn't have any. It's an election where you vote your party, because substance and honesty are almost impossible to find, especially with McCain's recent pandering to the right. I have to disagree, and not just about Obama. McCain, for example, has plenty of substance and experience. Obama has less experience than McCain by far, but is about on par with Clinton and some others. And there were candidates in both parties that are no longer in the race with plenty of it - my guy Bill Richardson, for example. I think people don't see substance because substance isn't on CNN. You want to find substance from these candidates, you have to check the policy docs on their websites... or read serious journals and papers, not just watch the MSM news... or if you have to go the TV route, watch PBS. The lack of "substance" in this race, to me, doesn't lie with the candidates... its lies with the media, and therefore, it also lies partially with the voting public who prefer sound bytes to hard information.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:05 AM) I agree that the media is finally starting to be at least something resembling fair towards Obama, but I've seen many of his speeches and still haven't found anything resembling substance about him. Even when he finally admits something like the cap gains tax hike, he then says he never said it. Tell you what. Show me how any candidate's speeches are more substantial than Obama's. They aren't. ALL the candidates, except maybe Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, have a variety of different kinds of speeches they give, depending on the venue. Some very policy-oriented, others are just pep rallies.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:01 AM) Indeed. I'm not sure how anybody can argue the guy has substance, Obama doesn't even do it with his own speeches. It's just about i'm young and good looking and likeable and have hope. He's just a young, masterful speecher that has made many people fall for his spell. In fact, this campaign has proven that any young, decent looking guy that can speak very well can put people under a trance, and that scares me big time. Obama seems to at least have good intentions, but a good speaker in the future might not. This is precisely what the GOP will use against him in the general. He's very good in the spotlight, so they say that's all he has. But to say that's true is kind of a joke. Seriously... point out to me, for example, how Clinton has had more "substance" in this campaign than Obama. She hasn't. They both do the same thing - they make some stump speeches that are rah-rah, they have the same level of detail in the debates, and they both have other speeches (and stuff on their websites) that gets into policy specifics. Mind you, if we're talking about experience here, then clearly McCain has far more than Obama. Clinton has a little more, but not much, or maybe even less, depending on your definition.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:55 AM) Because it's been media driven. Agree. QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:55 AM) There is no substance there Disagree - he's got as much "substance" as most of the other candidates, as far as i can see. He just also happens to be really good at the American Idol thing, which makes it easy for Clinton and the Republicans to say that's all he's got. QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:55 AM) and the media has given him a major pass. For a time, I agree, this was true. Then he got pretty well pounded, and is still getting hit hard.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:53 AM) I voted Wasserman, but that spot should really go to D.J. Carrasco... from watching this spring, he's better then both of them. Looking at Carrasco's history, I'm not sure I'd put a lot of stake in his spring performance. He had a 6.68 ERA and a 1.78 WHIP in Tucson last year, and had a 14.81 ERA and 3.10 WHIP the year before, in Japan. His best major league season, 2005 with the Royals, he had a 4.79 ERA and walked more guys than he struck out. Carrasco's spring earned him a spot in Charlotte, and that's about his speed.

Danks gets the start, against his old org.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 06:11 AM) Back after a week off. Didn't post last week because of some funky #'s on the scale (5 lb variations in 3 days). Down to 332 this week. Still have a lot of work to do and have to pick up the pace to hit my June 1 goal of 299. Hey man, you're losing more than 10 pounds a month - that's impressive!

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 09:29 AM) Dump MacDougal, keep both. That would be my call as well, but, I think that ship has sailed.

Trib article discusses it. Who should get it?

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 08:54 AM) If they won 72 and you minus 7, wouldn't that be 65-97? That is what he is predicting. Oh yeah, I got my math wrong. More than anything I was just expressing surprise - I haven't heard anyone else say anything as bad as 32 games under .500.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 09:54 PM) I'll say seven fewer wins than the Sox had last year, whatever that total is. You think they are going to go 67-95? That would be last place in this division, almost certainly.