shoota

I'd be down for 16" only. No gloves or coed BS. Edit: Assuming I don't have a league game that night.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 05:25 PM) I believe on Friday one Brooks Boyer said it was. Brooks Boyer sucks.

QUOTE(Balance @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 04:47 PM) The "Man Law" campaign has never even approached being funny. agreed.

man law isn't funny.

QUOTE(Damen @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 11:44 AM) This season is make or break for our scouts. Most of these trades are based off of guys who don't have the numbers yet but are promised to be studs. If these pan out, I feel extremely confident in the Sox maintaining their position in the Central for some time. If not, we've got some tough years ahead. Hopefully not.

Albert Elias, Harris' agent, told the Sun-Times that he was unaware of the promise and that Lange's demands constitute "a very unreasonable request considering Chris has over 40 family members trying to get tickets and he's only offered 15." The argument Harris shouldn't have to meet his spoken agreement because he only gets 15 tickets to the game is bogus since there are other ways for him to obtain tickets to the Super Bowl, ie buying a scalped ticket.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 04:35 PM) If I'm in Kenny Williams's shoes, the issue for me would not be the amount per year, it would be the duration. If Mark wants to talk about a 5-7 year deal, then anything more than that $10-$11 million would put me on the hook for more than I would want to spend. I'd be willing to push Zito's Yearly numbers...if I could get it over a short term deal. But I consider it insane to give a pitcher $15 million or more a year over 5+ years, regardless of who the pitcher is, if your total team's salary is in the $100 million range or less. Yeah, duration of the contract is important for KW to consider. The contract KW offered to Buehrle last season was short-term and at a low yearly amount. So until KW offers any type of contract more than $10.33 per year, he hasn't made an honest attempt to resign Buehrle. QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 04:41 PM) No we don't. That was reported by Bruce Levine. I like Bruce, but for as much ripping as he takes on these boards, its odd everyone is now believing his words to be gospel. As Flash said earlier, maybe they don't feel comfortable giving him a 5 or 6 year deal. If I was GM, I wouldn't, not after 2006. Correct, I don't know for certain that KW offered that contract to Buehrle, I was using Levine's report as my source. I do remember talks of Buehrle and KW negotiating last summer, so the report seemed credible to me.

WMVP played a clip last night of Buehrle stating he wasn't asking for Zito-like money. Buehrle also stated he's willing to take a discount to stay with the Sox. We know Buehrle rejected a 3-year deal at $31 million, and he's open to signing for less than Zito. That means he desires a contract more than $10.33 per year and less than $18 per year. IMO, until KW offers a contract between those two figures, he shouldn't be stating there's no way for him to resign Buehrle.

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 11:00 AM) i dont think thats the case...plain and simple, buehrle doesnt deserve to be the opening day starter, yea garland should start over contreras...but it shouldnt be buehrle One could probably make that argument and win, but what provoked Guillen to announce that decision now? If it was to inform fans at Soxfest, fine, but if it was a reactionary decision based on Buehrle's contract status, that's disgusting managing.

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 10:34 AM) ..ozzie said that contreras would be his opening day starter, i thought it would be garland... Another childish, a mi manera move by Guillen. Buehrle's been our opening day starter for what, 5 years, and now Guillen doesn't want him to start because he may not resign?

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Jan 24, 2007 -> 06:58 PM) You should be banned solely because your request involves an interview conducted on Jim Rome's atrocious radio show. Jim Rome has the most entertaining sports show I've ever heard. War slump busters.

How's Lisa Dergan taking this news? I guess I'll fill in for Pods for the next 6 weeks. I hope they have eggs at the house...

The weekend came and went, and so did I. Boss was right.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 18, 2007 -> 10:41 PM) Ummmmmm..........ew. They don't call me "shoota" for nothing.

QUOTE(Balance @ Jan 18, 2007 -> 10:14 PM) It definitely is one of the worst experiences I've ever had. So, what inspired you to toss back some yolks? My boss told me a story about his youth, how drinking 3-5 raw eggs a day for 5 days will give you a huge load. So I thought I'd surprise the girlfriend this weekend.

QUOTE(Balance @ Jan 18, 2007 -> 09:57 PM) This is not something I have tried. Stallone chugged some raw eggs down in "Rocky." That's all I got. Let us know if you get sick. Haha, will do. I've never had food poisoning, but I've heard it's one of the worst experiences some people have ever had.

I've read conflicting opinions on consumption of raw eggs, and I'm asking if anyone has had a positive or negative experience with them. I just downed 3. Tasted bad.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 08:52 PM) Career: Zambrano: 64-42, 977 IP, 3.29 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 7.97 K/9, 1.94 K/BB Oswalt: 98-47, 1201.1 IP, 3.05 ERA, 1.18 WHIP, 7.61 K/9, 3.86 K/BB Pitchers better than Zambrano: Clemens Oswalt Carpenter Santana Webb Halladay Pedro (after he comes back) Smoltz a case can be made for Peavy as well With the ballparks they'll be pitching in, I wouldn't rule out Schmidt and Zito putting up better numbers than Zambrano this upcoming season. Take a look at his career numbers in AL parks Yankee Stadium: 6.1 IP, 2.37 WHIP, 8.53 ERA USCF: 19.1 IP in 4 starts, 1.71 WHIP, 6.05 ERA @Baltimore: 2 IP, 3.00 WHIP, 13.5 ERA @Cle, 6 IP, 1.50 WHIP, 3 ERA In 6 starts in AL Parks, he has managed to go 33.2 innings, with a 1.87 WHIP and a 6.42 ERA I know it's a limited sample size (and it doesn't help that he can barely go 5 innings against an AL team,) but it's not just about the numbers, you can just watch the way he pitches. He's not stupid, and I don't blame him for walking or hitting guys to face the pitcher. El Duque used to do the same thing. Fall behind a hitter 2-0, just walk him. Don't want to face the next guy? Give him nothing but garbage. Very interesting, I had no idea. I forget the statistical analysis, but some believe Zambrano is likely to suffer injury in 2007 because of his 2006 season's walk rates. The theory has something to do with Z's increased 2006 walks compared to previous seasons, and how a sudden increase in walks is a precursor to injury.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2007 -> 08:44 PM) I would also fire back that in terms of raw value in a trade to other teams, a pitcher who is having success is worth more that what his value should be given that he's not playing every day. A #3 starter who pitches every 5th day right now in Free Agency is making as much or more than Konerko. Average pitchers right now seem to have the value of very good starting position players. Think of position players who $11 million a year is a fair deal, and then realize that Gil Meche and Ted Lilly are getting similar contracts. Interesting.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 11, 2007 -> 10:22 PM) So, basically all of sudden change the way a pitcher has been treated all of his career, just because. Eve if he goes into a slump, dont you think Mark BUehrle works himself out of it like the rest of the world thought? He had a horrible half of baseball, yet everyone expected him to turn it around every game he went out there, probably including our manager. He has also had a tendency to win games in his career where the other team scores runs early, and we match and win the game because he focused. Dont you think that hindsight took a little too much of the driver seat when you were thinking that at the END of the season? My criticism of Guillen's use of the pitching staff didn't start at the end of the season. You have a good point about Buehrle's struggles, I indeed was expecting him to break out of his slump with every second-half start he made. Though because it was theorized Buehrle was slumping in part because of overuse (260 IP in 2005, soreness in the Series, short offseason), his struggles might have been minimized with the occasional modest pitch count start. That strategy from Guillen could have freshened his arm, allowing Buehrle to rebound to the good pitcher he's always been. Perhaps Buehrle's second-half slump had nothing to do with throwing the most IP in his career, but I think there's enough evidence for a manager to be proactive in attempting to end his pitcher's slump. I criticize Guillen for not trying. I lobbied to put Vazquez in the bullpen and move McCarthy to the rotation. Since Vazquez was great pitching to batters the first two times he faced them, very bad the third time around, and there was a good chance McCarthy could pitch better, a swap of the two men made sense. Yeah, it hurts Vazquez's trade value at the conclusion of the season, but it potentially raises McCarthy's, and likely improves the 2006 team, which should be a manager's main concern. I could understand Guillen not making such a progressive swap, but he still failed in his decisions when to pull Vazquez. When it was well documented Vazquez gets hit hard in the 6th innings, Guillen still wouldn't have a man warming up in the bullpen to replace Vazquez before his 6th inning collapse. I understand a manager showing confidence in his players and giving them the chance to succeed, but I fault Guillen for not having a ready alternative for when Vazquez failed. In other words, I think Guillen gave Vazquez too much leash in the 6th innings. I found it disgusting Guillen kept pitching Jose Contreras the last third of the season when he should have been put on the 15-day DL. He was hurt, altered his mechanics and pitching far from his peak ability. I also believed if the Sox were to make the playoffs, they would need a healthy, dominant Jose Contreras to win another World Series. Brandon McCarthy was capable of filling Contreras's rotation spot during the 15-day DL.

QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 11:09 PM) First of all, I think we can all agree that bumping a thread to prove yourself right or someone else wrong is quite lame. And I've always found it humorous when people point to Ozzie's playing of Mack over Anderson as some personal grudge he has towards Anderson. First of all, such a suggestion is merely speculation, as I'm pretty sure there aren't many around here who really know what Ozzie thinks. With that being said, Ozzie was as much an advocate of Anderson as anybody before the season began. Then Anderson couldn't hit his weight for a whole half. Therefore, right or wrong, he chose to give Mack more playing time (and for the record, I didn't agree with it). If we had a decent backup CF, this would seem a lot more logical, but regardless, Ozzie saw Mack as the better option. How this all equates to some childish personal grudge is beyond me. And if were indeed the case, I highly doubt Anderson would have gotten as much playing time as he did. When you consider the overall season he had, I'd say the organization as a whole had a lot of patience for a guy who, at his best last year, was mediocre. The guy still played 134 games. Say Ozzie was wrong for playing Mack over Anderson, and I will basically agree with you. But to throw dumbass speculation out like this, at least to me, detracts from whatever point you are trying to make. This has to be my favorite argument. Ozzie used them no differently in 2005. Yet they seemed to be fine then. Did he operate his staff perfectly? No manager does. But in the end, almost every ounce of the fault falls on the pitchers themselves. Once again, announcing your rightness. A true sign of someone whose points lack significant evidence to back them up. Just because 4/5 of the starting pitching was the same in 2006 as it was in 2005, doesn't mean each pitcher would perform equally in both seasons. Guillen deserves fault for not adjusting his use of the 2006 staff.

I'm just going to go ahead and declare myself the winner of this discussion because I'm right.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 07:01 PM) Yeah, but he really had no other option, that is an evil when you break in a struggling Rookie in CF with no other legit CF'ers on your team. That "struggling rookie" was the team's best center field option in the second half, yet Guillen chose to bench him in favor of an inferior Mackowiak. The criticism is focused on Guillen's second-half use of the two. QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 07:02 PM) Hmmm. So all pitchers should be emotionless, and Ozzie was the one who cause extreme regression in his pitchers because he handled them poorly. I bet Mark Buehrle, as he was treated the same in every other season he ptiched for the sox, would love to blame his terrible season on Ozzie. It would then take the blame off of him where it belongs. No, that's not my interpretation.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 05:59 PM) I like how it's OK for fans to piss and moan when Mackowiak misplays yet another flyball, then blame Ozzie for being too dense to not play Mack in CF and call him a bad manager because of it, yet when Freddy stares at him or throws his hands up he's a bad teammate. There's a difference between fans accurately noting a manager's bad decisions and a pitcher who lets his emotions control his physical movements and demeanor. One takes place on a message board; the other occurs on-field and could hurt team chemistry and damage individual and team performance. QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 05:59 PM) I guess that makes the original complaining posters like shoota "bad fans." How come the second part of this quote wasn't bolded as well? It's very accurate. Well, part of the reason the 2006 staff performed so poorly is because of Guillen's decisions on how to use them. Thus, the blame for not making the playoffs circles right back to Guillen.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jan 10, 2007 -> 06:37 PM) Did it ever occur to you that Anderson may have had limited playing time for disciplinary reasons? He does have a history of cocky, immature behavior. Which ties into my criticism of Guillen putting personal relationships ahead of what's best for the team. Guillen's not the most rational guy, he's not a leader like Scott Skiles. Guillen's macho "a mi manera" attitude puts his ego in front of the team's benefit.