NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 12:35 PM) Instead of putting Support the Troops magnets on your car you might be able to actually help with the war effort! Proposed war tax Smart for the Dems, and I think its a good way to really show people what this war is costing them. If they want it that badly, they can pay for it. It won't pass of course, but just making the motion is a good move, I think.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 01:55 PM) Impossible. If I produce a pro ANWR drilling commercial and play it in a district that a candidate is against it, it would promote that candidate. Even if it does not specifically mentioned the cadidate by name. I disagree. I think that would be fine.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 01:16 PM) So no posts about the deaths in Iraq being at its lowest level since July06 for both troops and civilians? I was wondering if anyone would post it, so I waited a day out of curiousity... Then I figured I would go ahead and mention it. Yeah I saw that - very interesting indeed. I think the next few months may become very important. With Ramadan coming up, if October is also markedly lower than last year, then you have to start thinking that something is going better.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 01:01 PM) So then the issue always winds up being...what stops a candidate from dumping $20 million or so of his money into some organization that is formed outside his campaign but happens to favor policies he likes? I see no problem with that, as long as that organization doesn't spend money to specifically endorse or promote him/her or attack other candidates.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 10:50 AM) Speaking of tattoos....anyone else think Kat Von D is smoking hot? Who?

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 03:01 AM) I'm not sure Rickey will ever resurface. But if you are comparing one of the elite shortstops in the league to Rickey, it's Hanley, not Reyes. Reyes is very good, but I think he's more name than game. Hanley's the exact opposite, as he was way, way better than Reyes this season and it seems not many knew about it. Wite, I am not sure if your new sig is more or less distrubing than pancakes-for-nipples man.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 10:28 AM) Why do you say that? I'm not insinuating Owens is on anything, just that if Alex Sanchez was busted for them, anyone could've been on 'em. Yeah, that's definitely true. Could be. That's kind of why I made that part a seperate thought - some of those types of players would be too afraid of bulking up to do it.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 05:12 PM) NSS, here ya go, a nice guy made a table showing we've improved in a lot of areas statistically... Obviously, some things will change... Full season 2006 included all the Big 12 games against the toughest opponents - 2007 so far has been powerhouses like Akron and UNI making up half the stats. Let's see how those numbers look at the end of the year.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 10:15 AM) Why Newt isn't running... http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200.../02/390670.aspx How many times can he fit "McCain-Feingold" into that much text? Is he getting paid for every time he says it? Of course, it makes perfect sense. That little piece accomplishes lots of things for him - makes McCain look bad (by saying the law is bad AND associating him with Feingold), makes his organization that much more high profile (most people I am sure hadn't even heard of it before), and provides the perfect excuse for not running.

Per the Trib, Rafael Santana, who managed the Birmingham AA affiliate this season (68-72), will now take over managing the organization's Dominican operations at Boca Chica. He will be reporting to Dave Wilder (Sr Dir of Player Personnel). Also noted in the article, KW is getting all the scouts together in Phoenix prior to the org meetings this month, and has hired new scouts, including Kevin Burrell (former Sox scout from the 90's, also scouted for Boston and Houston). As more internal org moves are made, you can add them to this thread if you'd like. I suspect there will be others.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 09:16 AM) Second run through Obama, Dodd, Clinton. Wow, three GOP in Kaps and three DEM in NSS. Could there be bias in these surveys that steer someone to a certain political party? Actually, my top 3 on both surveys were the same mix - 2 DEM and 1 GOP.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 08:48 AM) Clinton hits the jackpot with $27M this past quarter. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/...-third-quarter/ Important note on that - $5M of that money cannot be spent on the primary process. The gap between Obama and Clinton, in terms of money that can actually be used in this process, is only $2-3M.

Well, there's one. I wonder who two will be. There are a handful of guys on the Sox I'd be willing to bet haven't. Among the big names: Konerko, Buehrle, Thome. I'd bet against any of those three. Plus a few of the scrapper types like Owens. Beyond that, to varying degrees, who knows?

QUOTE(gosox41 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:31 PM) So you see major changes on the horizon. It's goin to be awfully hard to do that with the payroll where it's at right now. Bob That is in fact one of the reasons that major changes will have to happen.

WTF?! I somehow ended up with, in order: Biden, Dodd, Brownback, Obama Weird. I think THIS SURVEY is a little more detailed, and I find, a bit more accurate (asks more questions, phrases them in such a way that its more general and covers more smaller issues). Its one we've used here before. Two things, though... One, be careful of the priority sliders - they only go to HIGH or LOW, so if its medium, don't touch it. Two, once you submit your choices, you have to hit SKIP past a couple ads to see your results. My results from that one: Barack Obama 63% Ron Paul 63% Al Gore* 62%

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 05:02 PM) I know I made it seem that way in my posts but I really don't believe that. I'm just saying, Lucy has absolutely no bat -- it's tough for me to see him being better than .200/.275/.315 in the future. You best have defense like I-Rod if you hope to stick around with a bat that bad. I think he'll probably do a lot better than that. He's not Gustavo or anything. At each level, he has eventually trended up to that .265-.275 level, with a wee bit of power, and a little speed. That, with hopefully plus defense, would be not too bad at all, if he can do it at the major league level. I think his AFL season and how he does at AAA next year will tell us if he is capable of that.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:41 PM) Just some interesting numbers. In 2007, the White Sox: were outscored 839-693, a 146-run differential, the largest for the team since 1976 struck out a club-record 1,149 times had a team batting average of .246 which was its lowest since batting .244 in 1988 did not have a player hit at least .280 for the first time since 1988 did not have a 100-RBI man in its lineup for the first time since 1990 had a .444 winning percentage which was the lowest since 1989 Oddly, that does point out one positive. With the lowest AVG and OBP in all of baseball and the 4th lowest SLG, along with the 6th highest ERA and the 6th lowest FPct on defense... I am surprised this team even managed 72 wins, and finish better than 7 other teams while playing in a tough division. I know, its weak, but I'm trying to find something here.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:45 PM) Kind of like our current President. Nothing like our current President. Our current President has done plenty - and done most of it really badly. And I guess I don't consider him likeable, nor would I call him trustworthy.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 03:33 PM) But our minor leagues suck. For position players, they do, particularly at the high levels (AA and AAA). For pitching, though, there is definitely some depth of talent there.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:34 PM) Then look at his season as a whole, from Birmingham through Charlotte through Chicago -- he wasn't very good. Did he deserve to be called up from Birmingham to Charlotte or was he called up more for 'organizational need'? I tend to think the latter, because his AA numbers were very mediocre, unless the organization is batting average and batting average alone. And if that's the argument they make for calling him up, we are in a LOT of trouble. Mostly the latter, unfortunately. Honestly, I'd rather the organization had catching prospects that were solid defenders like Lucy AND could hit reasonably well like Suzuki. But again, you seem to be 100% focused on offense. I am saying that for a catcher, defensive ability is very, very important.

Ya know, the more and more I watch him, the more John McCain reminds me of Jimmy Carter (except from the other side of the spectrum). Both guys are trustworthy, in my opinion, more so than most of the other candidates. Most people wouldn't doubt their patriotism, or their wanting the job in order to do what they thought was truly best for the whole country. Both very affable. But neither are great campaigners, and both seem like the types who don't fight back well (politically). I guess I'm of the opinion that John McCain as a President might be fairly ineffectual, kind of like Carter was, and also like Carter, prone to the occasional spazz-out. I guess I am saying that McCain seems like a good man, but not a good President.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:25 PM) Isnt it possible that Lucy is one of those guys that they were spot-on in evaluating? Hes just not that good. Of course its possible.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:17 PM) ok, so Bill Richardson is in an "ok" position, but Johnny Girly Man is not? I'm confused. Not in the grand scheme. I think its an OUCH for two reasons. One Edwards was once thought of as at the same level as Clinton and Obama - not the same level as Richardson. And two, Edwards' number went down a bunch. So I guess its a relative thing. Also, its better to be the guy whose numbers are going up (Richardson, who has gone from low single digits to double digits in IA and NH) than going down or staying stagnant.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 03:53 PM) He said "What I do mean to say is the United States of America was founded on the values of Judeo-Christian values, which were translated by our founding fathers which is basically the rights of human dignity and human rights," Do you disagree with that? I don't. And are we talking theoretical or in reality? We keep electing Protestants to office, we have In God We Trust on our currency. In court, until recently we swore under oath to God. Most people disagree with the courts when nativity scenes are taken down. Seems like the American public sure accepts Christian values. Why are there no avowed atheists running? Islamics? Buddists? I'm just going to ignore that second paragraph where you again go off topic. Regarding his revised quote, yes of course I agree. I took no issue with it, and if that was all he said, then great. But its not. He said something else before going back and mopping up his mess. Its his first quote that I took issue with. I've stated my point like 5 times now, and you keep wanting to direct me towards other quotes that are not what I commented on. I give up.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 04:01 PM) Using OPS isn't exactly fair to Suzuki. His minor league OBP was .376, so his OPS was generally OBP driven. If I'm reading the stats correctly, Suzuki was also at AA and AAA a year earlier than Lucy. That's huge. As far as speed, minor league stolen base numbers haven't proven to correlate much anything to the major league level. It's a definite thing in my mind. Lucy couldn't even hold his own at AAA (.471 OPS), and his promotion from AA (it could be argued) wasn't really merit based, as a .733 OPS doesn't scream "PROMOTION!". He's nowhere near 'big league' ready while Suzuki is, at a year younger no less, already a league average hitter. It's impossible for me to think otherwise. Looking at the stats and even the scouts' take -- somebody around here said the difference in Baseball America's rankings from Suzuki to Lucy was well over 50 spots -- it's impossible for me to think Lucy has any chance of being a better player going forward. 1. Yes, Suzuki is a year ahead - as I said - and yes that is huge. 2. Note that I didn't look at any stats for small parts of seasons, since numbers for both of them would be all over the place. I won't be looking at Lucy's 19 games at AAA as meaningful. 3. Looking at your last sentence, in bold, that is where we differ. I see a pool of major league talent that is very often not in sync with whatever the scouts said about them in college. You apparently believe that 50 draft slots means a guarantee as to which player will be better. I'd prefer to look at more recent information (as I cited), and also to look beyond hitting.