southsider2k5

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 04:02 PM) Might actually make him more tradeable, if the money is affordable in relation to likely arb numbers and includes 1 or more free agent years. Taking it a step further, this might be the trigger for trading Danks. Either they extend him and keep him around, or they try to extend him, fail, and use that as justification to trade him.

I'd love Martinez, but I am guessing he is out of price range.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 02:34 AM) Unless you're moving into a new stadium and are trying to sell tickets. I'm not saying that's a good reason to hire a manager, but everything I've read is that Loria is the one that wants Guillen. I've got to think that's for marketing purposes. He'd be a pretty popular figure in Miami and would bring a lot of interest to the team. Who in the hell buys tickets because of the manager?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 02:34 AM) Unless you're moving into a new stadium and are trying to sell tickets. I'm not saying that's a good reason to hire a manager, but everything I've read is that Loria is the one that wants Guillen. I've got to think that's for marketing purposes. He'd be a pretty popular figure in Miami and would bring a lot of interest to the team. Who in the hell buys tickets because of the manager?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 08:16 AM) You have to figure that is only a temporary situation, when (if?) Boozer comes back Scal's minutes have to be the first to go. Even if Gibson is playing well though, I don't mind being a little bit careful with his minutes, after he's already dealt with the foot problems last year. The Bulls' backcourt is killing them right now. They're getting a ton of production out of the PG spot on offense, but they're not getting any O out of the SG spot, and neither guard position seems to be doing anything productive on defense. The defense by the guards was horrible. Rose was getting toasted by Toney Freaking Douglass the entire game. They couldn't guard the three point stripe to save their lives. I know the percentage the Knicks shot was ridiculous, but at the same time, they almost all were wide open looks at the basket. No close outs, no fighting over the screens. Nothing.

Happy Birthday

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 12:42 PM) You and Balta still with the short memories. Do you not remember 1994? There was a lot of anger specifically directed at Clinton. And yet, things worked out for the better after the fact. I am not saying that necessarily will happen here, but I think there is a decent chance it might. It really depends on Obama and Boehner, more than anyone else, at this point. McConnell is still a minority guy in the Senate, he's going to scream and yell anyway, that's what he does. Forget remembering 1994, I thinking back to the 2001 to 2009 era.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 10:16 AM) Its a little different representing British soldiers than AQ terrorists as well. British soldiers were a representation of the crown, which was perhaps the most powerful govt in the world, and current govt of the US. (Boston massacre is before the revolution). Adams defended the British so that there would be a fair trial and that it would not further escalate the conflict. If the British soldiers were convicted in a sham trial, the British undoubtedly would have intervened. Furthermore, Adams had a Tory (British sympathizer) play the role of prosecutor. So you had a revolutionary as a Defense attorney and a Tory as a Prosecutor. Adams was not risking anything, he was not representing "terrorists" he was representing British soldiers who were being tried in criminal court. A better comparison would be if a US soldier was charged with being a terrorist in Afghanistan and one of the most prominent Taliban supporters defended the American soldier, while an American was chosen as the prosecutor. Or to use AQ, if a Bush supporter was hired to be the Defense attorney while the Prosecutor was a AQ supporter. Regardless the lawyers who support AQ terrorists were taking far more risk than Adams. Adams was representing the establishment (British Crown) and trying to put on a fair trial. In the AQ trials you had the establishment trying to do everything in its power to give an unfair trial, and you had a few attorneys trying to stand up for them. Many of them did good things, but there are times were we need to think for ourselves, instead of relying on others. People also need to remember that the British had a pretty solid level of support in the colonies. It wasn't overwhelming or anything, but enough people feared their reprisals at the very least, that they didn't support revolution.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 01:10 PM) Looks like Jim Hendry is after Nick Johnson to play 1B for the Cubs. Thats about the caliber of GM I would expect to sign this guy to start. Excellent.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 07:29 AM) But Danks doesn't want to be a White Sox by evidence of his turning down the exact same deal Floyd accepted. He's the Sox biggest trade chip. The whole article was about the Sox wanting Danks, but I am glad you got your usual plug for yourself in there.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 08:55 PM) You sound kind of like a Democrat here... lol He said work hard and succeed. That sounded nothing like an entitlement program.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 09:23 PM) I tend to think Coop and Hahn = good. Ozzie and Cora = not so good. I don't think the general consensus is that they're all fools. And yet all four of them had other franchises looking at them very seriously to lead their franchises to one degree or another.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 08:08 PM) This is why the NBA sucks at times, the refs have totally changed parts of the game with no calls and phantom fouls. The only thing that has been worse than the officiating (on both ends of the floor really) has been the Bulls team defense to this point.

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/news...ce=MLBHeadlines

QUOTE (PlunketChris @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 04:57 PM) Twitter: @SI_JonHeyman: #yankees asked #chisox for permission to interview pitching coach don cooper, but were rebuffed by chi. cooper has 1 yr to go on contract. So, Joey Cora is in the mix for managerial jobs, Coop is wanted by the Yankees, Hahn was interviewed for at least one GM job. It seems like the coaching staff and front office are pretty well respected throughout the league. I'm not sure what it means for the White Sox, but there's a lot of really good baseball people in the organization. Not to mention Guillen being coveted by the Marlins. I know the idea is that the Sox are a ship of fools, but the rest of MLB sure doesn't seem to think so.

Revolting

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 1, 2010 -> 11:24 PM) Cool. Please don't suspend him 2 weeks; it's no big deal. Just advise him to put me on ignore IMO. I'm the only person that seems to get him so riled up he posts personal stuf that could get him a 2 week penalty box. that was a funny post by squert! No, there are basic rules on the site, and repeated suspensions for name-calling and personal attacks seem to indicate that he hasn't respected the rules here. He has been suspended and it is way longer than two weeks as this is the third time he has been suspended for this exact thing.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 09:53 AM) Since a few people seemed pretty determined that the Yankees were going to make an offer, here's this and why would they? Gardner is a monster, they just traded for Granderson, and Swisher has been a damn nice bat for them. They like to keep that DH spot open to rotate some players WHO ARE ACTUALLY GOOD OFFENSIVELY, so I don't see where Crawford would have ever fit into the equation. And if the Yankees don't jump in, his price could drop a lot.

QUOTE (flippedoutpunk @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 10:11 PM) at least we still have the bulls.. I'll BRB, let me know when the weather is fair again k thx. I would still be willing to bet that the Hawks make it further in the playoffs than the Bulls.

Pucker up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 08:36 AM) Do you really not get that this is a logical fallacy? Seriously? Do you really not get the fallacy in your logic? Basically you are taking the Glen Beck side of things, where you have no burden of proof, but everyone else does.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 3, 2010 -> 07:14 AM) wtf? I've seen the people on his facebook page, I am going to trust his judgement in butts.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 06:47 AM) Because I'm not making a positive assertion, I"m asking you to support yours. Shifting the Burden is a logical fallacy. So basically you can just say prove it to every single person who posts something, and you have nothing to prove ever. Sure that makes perfect sense.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 4, 2010 -> 07:45 AM) It depends on how you define "Rich". He was a wealthy person based off of oil, but he multiplied that probably by 100 thanks to the Google. Is being millionaires no longer rich to you? Because that's what they were.

Not a chance.