iamshack

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 23, 2013 -> 12:02 PM) If there is a tear. This is Jay Williams times a 100. Greg Oden times 25. Grant Hill times 10. Just way worse than them all. We got all the hype. He was from Chicago. The majority of us knew he was when he was 16. We had the return. We had the MVP season. Just truly heartbreaking. I can't think of a parallel in my life as a sports fan. I remember being really upset when Thomas and Magglio went down in '04 but that is nothing compared to this. Gayle Sayers?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 22, 2013 -> 08:37 PM) Oh yea, that's a pump skimmer. They break inside the pumps and install the reader on the inside, it is a pretty big scam Well I'll be damned! That's some serious s***...

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 20, 2013 -> 07:47 PM) Alexei might be the 1st Sox player traded since he's over 30 , still has value but also has a $10M contract for the next 2 years. I think the Cards would get good value for those 2 years but the Sox might have a hard time finding a replacement unless the Cards offer us a SS back . However Hahn is looking for near ML ready players , guys who might be able to step right into the starting lineup and Jim Bowden said this "Mozeliak made it clear to us this morning that he'd like to trade a young "starting pitcher": for a "young controllable shortstop" . They might not be a match . Alexei isnt young but he is controllable for 2 yrs plus an option year so it's not like he would cripple the Cards with a bad contract. The Sox strength is young starters but we're likely to move move one of them . It's like a longshot they end up trade partners because both GM's are stubborn about getting guys they want. But you have all those SS's in your sytem and having Alexei for 2 or 3 years would certainly give them a chance to develop . I think in this runs environment, the price of middle of the field, young impact players is eclipsing young pitching by a fairly reasonable margin. Not sure how many GM's feel this way, but I certainly would. If I had a potential impact catcher, SS, or cf, it would take a very talented young pitcher to bring him back.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 20, 2013 -> 06:34 PM) I mean, he is right in the sense that Fielder would probably get at least $138M on the open market today, but he is ignoring the fact that Cano's deal is going to be just as awful in a few years. Cano won't even be close to being worth $27-28M in 3 or 4 years. He's also forgetting to mention they had to trade Kinsler....

So apparently there is money going Texas' way, but not sure how much as of yet. It has to be $30-40 million, no?

I hope Fielder vetoes it...if the Tigers aren't sending money to Texas, this is a huge coup for them

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 20, 2013 -> 11:48 AM) Just so it's said, I'd hate cheering for him to the point that I'd consume significantly less baseball. That'd be real good motivation to cancel my extra innings package. I'd hate to lose you as a fan, but don't let the door hit you on the way out!

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 08:38 PM) scs and I discussed this and I took a listen and, indeed, Waddle and Silvy discussed my article on Yahoo on their show today. Really cool for a small time bro like me The funny thing is that I met them before the Giants game at Ditka's and they certainly have no idea that I'm THAT guy Very well done, Jake!

QUOTE (mike65 @ Nov 20, 2013 -> 06:43 AM) Hello. I was last here around the trade deadline because I thought the Cardinals had interest in Ramirez. Back then, everybody was talking about Adams and Martinez as the possible trade chips. Now, with that pressure off, I am assuming the Cardinals still have interest. I read the other day that the four teams the Cardinals are speaking to regarding a trade are the Diamondbacks, Angels, Rangers, and White Sox. I don't believe the Cardinals will go the free agent route. Peralta doesn't fit the "Cardinal way" and Drew's being LH is a problem for the Cadinals because our GM has already said he doesn't want to go anymore left than the team is right now (Adams, Taveras, Carpenter, and Jay). What do you guys think the cost would be these days as compared to July? Welcome back, Mike! I will say this, I don't think Martinez is getting dealt for any of the pieces that have been previously discussed...I think his stock has risen significantly as a result of his Postseason performance. The same obviously goes for Wacha Wacha. Ultimately, the question probably depends entirely on how Rick Hahn feels about Alexei Ramirez, to which I don't think anyone really knows for sure. I would speculate that he is someone that Rick would like to keep around unless he feels like he gets one really important piece for us moving forward. That probably means a prospect they really like at a position of need, which is most likely 3b, C, or CF. Of course SP is always in demand, and might be something that gets discussed, but those other needs probably are higher up on his list.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 10:27 AM) Who posts a tweet that's all about a photo, and neither posts the photo nor the link to the tweet. 1,000,000 posts and a fail like this!?! How dare you. This is clearly one of your pet peeves

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 06:20 AM) Except that we do think about it. De Aza, Ramirez, Dunn, Viciedo, Beckham, Quintana, Santiago, Reed, and whoever have all sucked and need to be shipped out. Pierzynski and Konerko have done no wrong. Explain that. Explain wanting to trade Adam Dunn, eating salary, and resigning Paul Konerko. Maybe, just maybe, we actually do think about we're saying, we don't pigeonhole players, we all have different opinions of players, and we all respect why we generally do and do not like other players, but we do not respect why greg likes players because he states "trade Dunn, he sucks!; release Keppinger, he's a terrible!; resign Konerko because he's Konerko and how could you not like Konerko?" Generally speaking, people have some sort of objectivity towards other players. Greg misses that boat more often than not. and see above Amen to witesoxfan!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 05:55 PM) I like Lenovo if only for their keyboard. I think I've got to get a windows machine for work.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 05:16 PM) No, but I do think given the criminal mismanagement of the minor league system (Dave Wilder) that the organization is now paying for they should be more willing to use some of that enormous equity to dig their way out of this hole. They are; I'm no expert, but from what I understand, there are now limits in place for what you can spend in any given year?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 05:14 PM) Gotcha. I disagree with that, as there has to be some judgment involved somewhere. Ultimately I think if they never threw a flag last night, not much would have been made of it. Once you throw it and then take it back, it opens the floodgates. Was Gronk catching that pass? No way in hell. Was there a penalty? Debatable. So the outcome of Panthers winning is ultimately the correct one, but the way they got there wasn't very clean. You don't think that was interference? So say the defender that ultimately intercepted the pass wasn't there, and the ball fell closer to Gronk's feet, you don't think they should have called interference on Kuechly?

Best laptop running windows? Is it still Lenovo?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 05:02 PM) Earlier in the thread. I think this was always applying the criteria that this would be wise.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 04:59 PM) Not arguing it should be spent. Arguing that they can spend it if they want to. I don't think anyone disputed that, like ever.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 02:52 PM) The republican minority in the Senate is blocking yet another DC Circuit Court appointment by Obama. This makes number three, and they're not even pretending to have a real reason at this point. http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/11/...urt-of-appeals/ I'm not sure why the Democrats don't just junk the filibuster already. I really hope republican voters hold the party accountable for this nonsense.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 04:51 PM) Was your counter argument that there is no correlation to payroll and winning? I thought that was common knowledge. There is a correlation, but it isn't necessarily strong. If you concede that, on what basis are you arguing that the $10 million should be spent? To achieve what?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 04:41 PM) And that's the Sox problem. It's never been money. Their goal is to build a competitive team and hope it gets a few breaks. It's been a great strategy for the investors over the last 30+ years, but not so much for the fans. You don't seem to answer counter arguments. You just move the goalposts.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 04:33 PM) If you're arguing that they shouldn't determine if it's catchable or whatever in real-time, you can slice that argument both ways. You can't just assume everything is catchable, either. The answer could be that it needs to be reviewable. I'm saying whether something is catchable shouldn't even be a consideration. If there is an infraction, there is an infraction. If the ball is in the air and hasn't been touched, you can't interfere with a receiver.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 04:00 PM) Dick Allen made the best point in this thread. How do you feel when the Sox make $15M and finish second? Again, if the correlation was stronger between payroll and performance, it would be a stronger case.

And this is why the officials shouldn't be trying to determine in real time whether a play that close was catchable. You guys, who I consider pretty bright guys, can't even agree after looking at the replay all day. The defender interfered with the receiver while the ball was in the air and prior to it being touched by a defensive player. Jenks, please explain to me why the refs should go through some real time determination of an freak athlete's capabilities (combined with a moving object, other moving players, etc), rather than enforcing a clear infraction that NO ONE. Denies occurred?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 12:28 PM) So would you get rid of the uncatchable exception altogether? I would, yes. We don't have a rule that says a holding penalty can be changed because the hold was on the other side of the field. The officials aren't in the business of determining whether illegal blocks in the back on kickoff/punt returns would have actually impacted the return. If there is a block in the back, there is a block in the back and they throw the flag. I don't know why we need to have this special exception here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 19, 2013 -> 12:25 PM) I think "making pass interference calls reviewable" is just about at the top of my list for rule changes I'd like to see in the NFL. It's just such a huge play, it can make things swing by 50+ yards and we can all remember seeing incredibly bad blown calls on it. Same standard as every other overturn, there has to be conclusive evidence nothing happened on the video (or that the guy was completely mangled while trying to catch the ball), but make it reviewable. In this case, the call on the field would probably stand as you can't clearly demonstrate he'd have been able to make that a catchable ball. I don't believe that should be the criteria. That's not really clearly demonstrable. What would the criteria be from determining whether something was catchable? IMO, you need to take uncatchable off the table. An interference infraction should be an infraction, just as plenty of other things are that may or may not affect the play in question.