TitoMB345

no love for the widescreeners? nice work though!

Bobby Jenks looks "great" in this pic: http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...nes&index=6 Seriously encouraging. I know they said he lost about 20-25 pounds, but that proves it to me. He looks better/

Brian Anderson

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Feb 12, 2007 -> 02:17 PM) HA. happens on Comcast Sportsnet too. I can't recall a game on CSN where there was a constant hum drowning out the announcers.

WCIU is absolute garbage. I can distinctly remember 5 games last year where the audio was messed up and I had to take out the radio and listen to the silence that was Chris and Farmer.

Johnny G.

nice.. i also love the cubs being 8-1. LOL. they must be banking a lot on Ted Lily winning 20 games.

DFA

Count me in on the softball game. I'll get down there on that day.

MAN I cant wait for Baseball season to start again. Gah but I wont be able to watch a lot of the games from Indiana!

uh..... i'll record one myself and send it to you..?

QUOTE(Cali @ Jan 24, 2007 -> 07:26 PM) LF - Bobby Jenks CF - Paul Konerko Rob Mackowiak RF - AJ Pierzynski That would be a worse SOX outfield. Fix't.

Well, the choice is obvious for me, as I am a diehard Cheesehead. But I'll still give my input just to say it. The 2005 White Sox World Series tops everything else in my history of sports. The 1996 Packers Super Bowl is second, and its not that close. I don't get teary-eyed and goose-bumped when I think of the 1996 team. For the '05 Sox, I do. It's incredible, even to this day I still get that reaction.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 19, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) I don't see that stated in the article. Perhaps because he's not listed as a top-5 prospect? They list him as being in contention for the 5th spot, so I guess that means hes not really a prospect, somehow.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 03:34 AM) Joe Crede 2007 ~ Ed Sprague 1997 With a higher batting average than Sprague's .228 but a lower OBP than Sprague's .306. Harsh...

.297/.350/.525, 21 homers, 80 RBIs

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 13, 2007 -> 08:16 PM) Well, after getting out of the shower this morning and drying off, I sat down, unrolled a pair of them, and proceeded to pull one up over each of my feet. What? Hahahaha, thats actually hilarious! Hahahah!

Frank Thomas, plain and simple. I grew up idolizing him in little league. He is my absolute favorite of all time (in baseball).

ugh

How nice would it have been to have had Gagne closing for us from 2000-2004?

My prediction: he won't shoot any more people.

How about Sammy Sosa for LF/Lead-off.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Dec 25, 2006 -> 04:19 PM) I thought this quote was pretty funny from Arvia: Isn't that all the Sox need, a bottom-of-the-rotation and middle-of-the-pen guys? Also, wasn't that exactly what McCarthy was in 2006 and was going to be in 2007? I know he has more upside than that, but with the other four veteran starters returning, more than likely he would have been the 5th starter. I firmly believe McCarthy would outperform Vazquez. While he would probably be listed as the 5th, I have solid belief we would recognize him as the 4th. But that is just a minor detail.

2004 sucked... and 2007 is going to be much the same. No 5th starter. Man, it's going to be ugly.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 06:30 PM) Hell, I love the concept of throwing Charlie into the bullpen this year, but yes, I think there will be a huge difference between the performance of Charlie Haeger and Brandon McCarthy next year. Or Brandon and Floyd, Brandon and Danks, Brandon and anyone else you name. Just from watching Brandon the last 2 years, I think he's going to wind up being one of the best pitchers in the AL. Agreed as well. Look at what Brandon did in November 2005. I don't care if you say he didn't have enough games to prove anything... the guy stepped the f*** up. In the heat of a race with the Indians, he was there shutting everyone down. I still think he was too uncomfortable coming out of the pen last year as well. I was expecting big things out of McCarthy, or atleast a big name in return for him. We didn't get that.