southsider2k5

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 02:51 PM) It was actually quite interesting yesterday on the "Steve Dahl Show" podcast of all things. Pat Boyle from Comcast Sportsnet was on, and he told Dahl that he's heard rumblings that Ozzie is gone at the end of the year, and none other than Carlton Fisk will be the new manager. I don't quite know how legit that is, but coming directly from Boyle, there just might be something to it. They would pretty much be the same type of managers. I don't see a chance in hell of that actually happening.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 02:34 PM) OK, I called and asked my mom exactly what my grandmother had. She said it was just an infection (I asked if it was specifically bacterial and she said yes, but she sounded like she wasn't really sure). But infections can sometimes have that effect on the elderly, apparently. How old was she? My mom is only 58. She still lives alone and works as a nurse.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 01:12 PM) the same way the Twins do it. So you'll still buy tickets if we go 11 seasons between playoff appearances while we build ourselves like the Twins did?

She is actually a ton better. There was a period of time where she thought still lived and worked where she did 30 years ago. Things are a lot better now. There are still some recent memory gaps, but most everything is back to normal, or close to it. No stroke, no Alzheimer, no drug interactions, nothing psychological, they can't find anything. The frustrating part is that we have no idea what happened, well that and the arrogant doctor who thinks we don't deserve the chance to try to find out something.

QUOTE (scenario @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 11:11 AM) Yeah, take away Morel, Viciedo, and Sale and I find it hard not to throw up looking at their roster. (Although I still think Jordan Danks could pan out if he can cut down on strikeouts.) One thing that surprised me this year was how horrible Rochester... the Twins AAA team... was. They had one of THE worst records in all of MiLB... winning almost 20 games less than Charlotte. I said this on PHT a while back, but the crazy thing is that Beckham could have been making his ML debut now, and he still would have been considered a success.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 11:02 AM) here's what i don't like. While Williams would protest that the team's goal every year is to win the World Series and that anything else is a failure, in truth they're annually built to win 85 to 90 games, with the understanding that with some good fortune they might win 95 and a pennant, and that with a few injuries or off years they might slip below .500. 2010- Twins on pace for 97 wins 2009- Twins 87 wins 2008- Sox 89 wins 2007- Indians 96 wins 2006- Twins 96 wins 2005- Sox 99 wins 2004- Twins 92 wins 2003- Twins 90 wins 2002- Twins 94 wins 2001- Indians 91 wins 2000- Sox 95 wins So if that truly is the goal, we are undershooting what it takes to win a division. 85-90 win seasons won the division 3 out of the past 11 seasons. The average win total it took to take the Central was 93.27 wins. If you take 85-90 and cut it down the middle, to say 88 wins.. that would have won the division only 1 time!!! One hole in that... What it takes to win a division is based on who finished second. If the second place team won 85 games, it only took 86 games to actually win the division.

I had a doctor tell me honestly yesterdat that despite not being able to tell me what happened to my mother, what caused it, why she was recovering, or if it could happen again, that my mom got the best possible care she could get and the doctor refused to give a referral to another doctor for a second opinion. This was my mom who worked an eight hour shift one day, and then the next day was in a mode where she didn't know her name, where she worked, where she lived, or just about anything relevant in her life. Somehow I am just supposed to accept that answer.

Well if Paulie can do something to finish, he has his signature ESPN moment with getting hit in the mouth with a pitch in the first inning, and then going yard with a massive fat lip in his next AB.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 17, 2010 -> 08:08 AM) People have been saying that about the Royals for 10 years too. The Royals have been over .500 once since 1995, and haven't even been to the playoffs for 25 years. They have been feeding us this crap about the Royals being back for years now, and it always falls apart. I see no reason to believe it until it actually happens. Put away the Alex Gordon jerseys.

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 01:31 PM) Excellent. It's not like Kenny had a chance to replace those 24HR, 77 RBIs. Gardenhire probably handled Thome's playing time better than the Sox would have. He also got to see better pitches batting 7th. Thome's not going to be helping them as much help if that cold air moves in Oct for home games and you never know what will happen in NY. If the Twins face TB, I like their chances because Thome will be in the lineup in that dome. This isn't the first guy we've seen go to another organization and have better success. Often it's in more consistent winning organizations. Environment has something to do with it. People forget that even in more team oriented sports like football. Justin Morneau is the reason that Thome is playing right now, not Ron Gardenhire.

Did anyone else watch Chasing Mummies? I liked the series overall when they stuck to the archeology, but it got annoying to listen to Hawass yell at everyone.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 16, 2010 -> 01:57 PM) Can we all agree that if AJ Pierzynski did this and it wound up costing a team in the AL East a game...he'd be treated as the worst villain in baseball history? Unless he was a Yankee...

I will go contrerian and say that Sale will be in Charlotte to start next year as a starter.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) holy sh*t. how is it that we had this perfect balance in 1999-2001 where we were running a surplus, and ever since then both sides have been destroying it. we can't keep cutting taxes for anyone/everyone and we can't keep spending like crazy. Why cant we go back to the tax rates of 1999-2001 and back to those spending levels too? It was a classic bubble. Why does the left always forget the recession that followed that?

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 01:06 PM) Only compared to what he used to be. Some people here act like Manny has hit .200 with this team and looked bad in every at bat. Manny is hitting .270 with us and an OBP of .400. Those are bad for Manny's standards, but compared to the rest of this team, he has still been one of the betters players on the team. He has the numbers of a lead off guy, without any of the speed or baserunning skills. We are paying him a million dollars a week to get important hits, not draw walks.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 09:10 AM) The conservative message as sold by Limbaugh, Hannity, Malkin, Coulter, etc. is not diverse. The Republican party typically can stay 'on message' and votes more cohesively than Democrats. On talk radio and talking head TV, opinions and positions are dictated, not discussed. It is more cohesive to an authoritarian philosophy than to "free thought" or progressive philosophy. The opinions expressed by Limbaugh, Hannity et al are right-wing authoritarian in nature. Compare this to some show on NPR that may blather on and on in a round-table feel-good discussion of ideas. For whatever reason, the conservative message sells well via the "shout things at you and tell it the way it is over the airwaves" model. While you do get intelligent conversations from people like the late William Buckley, actual conversations and discussions (not having someone parrot what you believe or bring someone on to berate them) are the exception and not the norm. The inability of liberal talk radio to catch on may be somewhat self-fulfilling, since the people who would typically be the target audience of liberal talk radio is also going to buy into the idea of "intellectual liberal" and will not value a talk radio host as much as an NPR round table. The above may or may not make sense. I'm a bit sleep-deprived right now. Also libertarians are libertarians, not conservatives, at least imo. I think they'd describe themselves as "classical liberals" more so than associate with modern conservative movements. Sounds a lot like NPR to me.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 08:56 AM) I think an argument can be made here that a bill like SB 1070 in Arizona changes the prism of the government from presumed innocent until found guilty to the other way around. Which is the reason I am actually against this bill. That type of logic has become way to easy to use in this country. I have no problem accepting that people will die because of the rights we have. Those rights are the most important thing here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 08:35 AM) But sir...the reason why the racial angles and everything else comes up is that "limited interference in all aspects of their lives" is a slogan that goes away the moment that it becomes inconvenient. By far the best example I could ever give of this effect is SB 1070...which, whether you want to admit it or not, is by definition a gigantic government interference in people's lives. "I'm from the government and I'm here to check your papers to make sure you're not breaking the law" is about the most classic oppressive government line you can come up with, yet, that bill has gotten virtually zero anger out of the tea party. I can come up with a solid variety of continuing examples from the past couple years as well. "I'm from the government and I'm listening to your phone calls to make sure you're not breaking the law" would be one of those things that would get a legimate "limited government interference" group riled up, but because the Terrorism excuse gets applied...no one cares. I'm from the government and I'm here to torture you until you talk, or I'm from the government and you don't get a trial because I say you don't...same exact line. The center of the Republican party is no more hands-off than the center of the Democratic party, it just picks different issues to be hands-off about. Protecting the country from foriegn invaders is supposed to be one of the things that our federal government does.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 07:43 AM) He'll be gone soon enough...too bad the Sox can't get back some of the terrific young talent they've traded away (Gio, Hudson, Richard)....Kenny brought us an older, wiser...but no more successful team. Our scouts and org. did a great job with some kids and we deal them off for (mostly) garbage. I'd love to see one post where someone called Clayton Richard a "terrific young talent" before he was traded. I know Hudson had a few fans, but not too many. Before they were dealt a lot of people who are their biggest fans know thought those two kids were garbage themselves.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 15, 2010 -> 07:51 AM) I've thought for a while that a growing Tea Party is good for the Democrats. A Tea Party candidate vs a Democrat only energizes the dem base ("we don't want that Tea Party wacho in there") and disenfranchises the more centrist republicans. I don't think that is true at all. The centrist repubs are the ones who wanted limited interference in all aspects of their lives. They are excited by this movement because it not only focuses on taxes, but also spending and rules. The real center of the party is much more hands-off. The Democrats are threatened by this which is why they have mobilized so quickly to label the entire movement as racist and uneducated, which you are seeing on this very board. They are painting a vocal minority as much more than it really is. It would be akin to painting guys like Al Sharpton and the guy who took Discovery hostage as the center of the Democratic party.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Sep 14, 2010 -> 02:35 PM) Sorry, that's just ridiculous and I don't agree at all. But I regress. I think I've made my point. JPN, scenario, chasefan, I respect your points/opinions. I'll just leave it at that. You are saying that you only care about the very best and the top of the heap, and the rest don't matter, yet here you are on a random message board. By your logic, you should only care what the Chicago Tribune has to say about the Sox, because the message boards are the lowest form of information.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 14, 2010 -> 01:52 PM) Exactly. Overall...I think you might be right that going for it might be the right move...but the Bears did everything possible to make sure that the odds were against them. They left Forte in rather than swapping out backs. No one went in motion. There was no trickery at all; there was every reason to think you just had to stuff a straight ahead run one more time. The only attempt at any trickery was on a poorly set up 2nd down pass. Forte, furthermore, is I believe noted as one of the worst short yardage backs in the league in other statistics; his running style lends to him not getting through piles well. The percentages there are lying because the Bears did nothing to put them in their favor. Logic tells me that each circumstance is its own set of odds. Each instance is its own event. At least that is how it would be approached if you believe in advanced statistics.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 14, 2010 -> 01:45 PM) Do the statistics change at all in cases where you've already been stopped for 3 consecutive plays? No idea honestly.

Something interesting I came accross for the stat heads of Soxtalk talk... Lovie Smith was right to go for it on the 4th down play from the 1 yard line... http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/09/lovies-blunders.html

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Sep 14, 2010 -> 12:04 AM) Like I said, to each their own. I've never in my baseball fan life given two s***s about whether one of our minor league affiliates actually won or lost a game. All I care about when it comes to the minor leagues are LEGITIMATE prospects, not nice guys (Jeff Bajenaru comes to mind) that have no chance in hell of making it to The Show. I look at this Dash team, and I don't see one guy with a snowball's chance in hell of sniffing Chicago before, I don't know, 2013? If then? And another thing that makes minor league titles worthless is that the elite talent is obviously going to make it to the big leagues at some point during any given year. The elite talent that's leftover usually jumps at least one level during any particular year. So by playoff time you don't even have anything close to the team you started with most of the time. Just a bunch of roster filler and AAAA guys on their last harrahs before it's time to go out and get a real job. I will say you have a point for those that don't live in Chicago. But you have to see where I'm coming from as well. The irony here is that you post on a baseball message board, where what you are saying is even less relevant than anything you are posting because you have exactly a zero chance of having anything to do with the White Sox organization, well, ever. By that logic, you should never want anyone to read or hear what you have to say about the Sox.