shoota

Someone needs to wear a Guillen jersey at the corner of Halsted and Belmont this Sunday.

A lot of Sox fans say they dislike Jay Mariotti, but I'm pretty apathetic to him. I don't read the Sun Times and I don't watch ATH, so maybe my lack of Mariotti exposure is the reason for my apathy towards him. The only complaint I have with the guy is that he never enters the clubhouse to interview and get to know Sox players--though that's partly because the organization doesn't want him there. I'm not apathetic to Ozzie's gay comment to Mariotti. I find it hilarious and refreshing. Today's society looks down on such use of "***" and people are bullied into silencing their use of it. There's no silencing Ozzie though, and the fact that he used it publically is a step in the right direction.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 09:18 AM) This game was one of those bizarre occurances of coincidence surrounding the number 20 Date: June 20, 2006 Score: 20-6 Anniversary: 20th since the Sox fired LaRussa Record: 20 games over .500 Kinda weird. Of course, I realized all this due to hindsight, which they say is 20-20 vision. Well done.

QUOTE(lukeman89 @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) here is a small sample size of what i know about the opposite sex they have vaginas between their legs ('cept your mom) they suck at driving they know nothing about baseball they make less money than men they have too many pairs of shoes they are b****es they can sense when a man is being insecure, and they done find it attractive they know when a man is kissing up to them, and they dont find it attractive using "Hey i like that shirt, it hides your belly really well" as a pick-up line works like a charm. i can go on, but i figure if i leave you with a sample size larger than jon garland's pitching stats in the 9th inning of a start in 2006 you can get some sort of an idea of my knowledge of women Awesome.

QUOTE(CardsJimEdmonds15 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 10:38 PM) Brilliant.. he was mad about being moved to the pen too.. he's gaining his weight back.. supposedly he could ask for a release and I'd be fine with it!!!! Alright I'll take a shot but it wont hit much.. He started the year off fine and his pitching was hitting the spots.. he was like 5-2 with a 3.4 ERA mid May.. he came off a stellar 8.1 IP of shutout ball against the Mets.. since then he just doesnt have it.. He missed a start due to back problems and one has to think he's injured and trying to pitch.. He doesnt have velocity, he cant spot pitches, etc.. at leastwhat most Cards fans are feeling now is he's trying to pitch hurt.. Not a good time for the Cards pitching wise.. they we're strong all year until recently.. I dun get it! That was the quality analysis I was looking for. Thanks CJE.

I left the game once it reached hilarity, so will someone inform me of the bean ball incidents?

QUOTE(CardsJimEdmonds15 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 10:33 PM) LoL good blowout guys.. I'm just glad we scored a few runs in the 9th, lol.. Hoping it'll be better soon.. As a Cards fan, you have more insight than I do about Mark Mulder. I heard Hawk mention he's lost velocity on his fastball. Is that true, and is that the only problem with Mulder's pitching? Break it down for us Sox fans.

Game.

swing the f'n bats Cincy Warm up Riske plz

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 08:08 PM) I'd take the auto-out at the beginning of the top of the 10th over Mack in center field any day of the week. Right, plus it's not like we can't pinch hit Mackowiak for Jenks anyway. So this double-switch potentially gives us another inning from Jenks.

BA would have had it.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 08:06 PM) I'd say BA in CF is more important than the double switch right here. With a 3-run lead, I agree.

This team is easy to cheer for.

An obviously Sox friendly crowd serenades their World Champion team with "Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye."

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 02:36 PM) This Jerome Williams?(this years ML stats for Jerome williams) If I were Dusty (*shudder*) I would take my chances with Glendon Rusch. Yeah, those stats show what a bad 12 innings he had in April, and explain why he was demoted to AAA. At this point in the season, there are a few reasons why Williams is the better option than Rusch. One being the performaces of Rusch, another being his expiring contract, and also Williams's contract status and age. I can see why you'd disagree with Williams being a better option that Rusch, but Guzman and Hill are two other options in the organization. Dusty Baker has choices, and I don't believe Glendon Rusch is the best option.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 01:57 PM) He does? I'm no Dusty Baker fan. But Mr. Jim Hendry has given him little-to-nothing to work with pitching wise. QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 01:59 PM) Who? You posed the problem implying there was a solution. Jerome Williams is the best option, and he's currently in AAA. IMO, he should have Rusch's spot and Rusch should be released. But in a year when postseason play is very unlikely, even Rich Hill and Juan Guzman are better options than Rusch because it'd help them evaluate their future roles in the organization.

Dusty deserves blame for starting Glendon Rusch even though he's been horrible all year. Dusty has better options than Rusch.

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 12:54 PM) You have got to be kidding me, that would give a total advantage to the american league. This ruls is fair as is, you just dont like the fact that both konerko and thome can play admit it. A rule is a rule bud. Which is the basis for my proposal. The AL's rule is DH; the NL's rule is pitchers bat.

QUOTE(RX Bandits @ Jun 17, 2006 -> 11:55 AM) so the AL teams would get an extra hitter and the pitchers for the NL would still have to bat? nahh way to unfair Exactly.

I'm not a fan of AL and NL teams adopting the other league's rules when they are the visitor. I propose that no matter which team is the home team during interleague play, the AL should keep its DH rule and the NL should keep its pitchers bat rule. This rule change should apply in all regular season interleague games as well as all All-Star and World Series games.

QUOTE(Contreras @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 06:54 PM) I consider Garland being moved up a day a very large loss. Which, if it happened, might not even result in an extra start on the year.

QUOTE(3RDBASE @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 06:40 PM) LOL...SHOOTA...you said it was very likely he would have not been thrown out...thats what i highlighted (AN EXAMPLE THAT IT WAS LIKELY)and noone knows what "could have" happened as a result he could have gotten suspended ala The big unit for example...so I stand by my post, and besides (not very important to this debate) MB losing his streak was a big deal to me and alot of other MB fans especially after no warnings. I just agree that if anyone were to be lost I'd rather it be Tracy not Javy who is more valuable to the team right now...ok?...OK!... Im done...keep trying. Its humorous. Your argument is jumping around like Jesse White's tumblers. Yes, I too was upset that Buehrle lost his streak of pitching at least 6 innings per start, but that is not relevant to your or my point. Yes, I also believe Javy is more valuable to the Sox than Tracey, but my point is that Vazquez had an opportunity to retaliate after the first time AJP had been hit because it was before the warnings. If Cuzzi didn't eject Padilla for hitting the same Sox player on the first pitch TWO TIMES, it's UNLIKELY that Vazquez would have been ejected and thus suspended had he hit one Ranger batter. Also, I did not say "it was very likely [Vazquez] would have not been thrown out" as you claim, I said, "Since no warnings had been issued at that time, it's unlikely Vazquez would have even been thrown out, let alone suspended."

QUOTE(Contreras @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 06:37 PM) On the other hand, We have this... ...And what happens if Blalock rushes the mound throwing haymakers and dislocates someone's shoulder? Better Tracey than Vazquez. Your link detailing Randy Johnson's five-game suspension IS NOT "a very large loss." Johnson will have his next scheduled start pushed back one game. You consider that "a very large loss"?

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 06:26 PM) Accept it. He's responsible for his actions, obviously, just don't expect a transformation in personality. He's said in numerous interviews from the Chicago Tribune to Outside the Lines he's not going to change. I'm not professing "Ozzie being Ozzie," I just don't care. It's that simple. I watch baseball for baseball, not a manager's comments. Show up the entire fanbase for all I care. Just make the correct managerial decisions on the field when it counts. Your post doesn't necessarily conflict with mine, the one you quoted. So what specific part(s) of my post do you disagree with? Here it is again: I hate that reasoning. Any time Ozzie's passion gets out of control he isn't responsible because that's just his personality? Bulls***. Wrong is wrong no matter what type of "flavor" a person has.

QUOTE(3RDBASE @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 06:09 PM) AU CONTRAIRE MON FRARE...MB got thrown out last year for doing that...ending his streak, remember...so it could have happened...so your wrong as well. LOSE TRACY OR LOSE VAQUEZ...UMMM I WILL GO WITH LOSING TRACY Yeah, Buehrle was suspended for weeks after that incident. :rolly Contreras' Crew stated: "Vazquez would be a very large loss." I disagreed, and explained why. Your post only strengthens my argument by providing an example of a similar incident where the starting pitcher wasn't suspended at all. Losing Buehrle for the rest of that game was not a "very large loss" nor would it have been "a very large loss" had Vazquez been ejected last night.