iamshack

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:26 AM) I agree. The Sox got Rios for a couple of months and all his boys made excuse after excuse for him. He wasn't for 2009, he was for the future. He needed time to adjust. BS. The Sox need more offense in April, May, June. Wait until July, it may be too late. I don't think people made excuses for him. He was downright horrible after he came over last year. The point is that 2 months don't determine whether it was a good claim or not.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 02:55 PM) Honestly Milkman i'm doing exactly that. I don't want it to happen, but i can't help but think that it just might. I am actually welcoming the possibility.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 03:47 PM) I'm hoping there's another option, such as a trade. Ahh, yes, that possibility excites me as well.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 02:40 PM) I'd be disappointed. I would be very disappointed. So you'd honestly not have him on the team and go with what we have?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 02:28 PM) Because there are multiple backup catchers' on the market, and Castro was reportedly talking with other teams (there was a rumor a couple weeks ago he was close to signing with the Blue Jays but that seemingly fell through). Yeah, maybe the offer sat on the table while Castro was out there searching for something better. Deal seems too standard to make it seem like there was much negotiation occurring here. Castro either was out looking for a better offer and decided to take this offer that was sitting on the table, or a deal will be completed shortly by the Sox either to bring in Thome or to send out Flowers. That is my official stance.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 02:25 PM) Really, he has to now. I could understand keeping the DH slot open if you wanted FLowers to get 200 AB's there. You can't platoon Jones and Kotsay at your DH spot, you just can't. I really think it means Thome is signed any day or a deal is made sending Flowers away. Why else would this move have taken so long?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 02:20 PM) This was the right move. Knowing AJ's history, Flowers would only have gotten a handful of AB's. Plus it saves us a year pre-arbitration on him, lets him develop a little more in the hitter's park of Charlotte, and maybe lets him build up trade value if we do decide we really like one of the other catchers we have at a lower level. I don't know about that. The issue with the team as currently constructed is our DH is a rather weak platoon situation. I would have rather given Flowers a few starts a week at the catcher position and a few starts a week at the DH position, because I think he could probably help the team more than giving the PAs to some of the other guys on this roster. Instead, this means Flowers will be in Charlotte or traded, and more PAs will be taken by the likes of Nix, Kotsay, and Castro than I will enjoy. OR, KW could make the obvious move and go out and sign Thome now.

My guess is a DH will now be signed or a trade will be made shortly.

Dick Vitale is making me sick on Mike and Mike right now. How hypocritical and naive.

Hah. Fun.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:09 AM) I'm not ashamed of them. They are smart, easily trained, easy to pick up and carry if necessary, and don't shed. I wasn't implying you should be ashamed of them. I was giggling at you claiming they could make you do things with their "cuteness."

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:52 AM) I've got a couple poodles (allergies). Miniature and toy. They can convince you to give them things with their cuteness. It's a horrible power. Can we save this post to razz you with for the remainder of your life here on earth?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 08:29 PM) That was a terrible officiating crew in the Packers-Cards game. There was atleast one horse collar penalty that should not have been called - you can grab someone by the collar, but you can't tackle them from the collar. If that's not how the rule is interpreted, then it's more ticky-tacky than roughing the passer. And there was also a defensive holding call against Michael Adams late in the game that I didn't think even happened. He had his arm in front of him, and arm behind him, and the receiver - I think it was Driver - had full range of motion to do what he wanted and Adams was just playing him tight. Adams knocked the ball away at the exact right moment, and it looked like a clean play. Maybe I need to see a replay to actually see a hold, but I didn't see anything. Couldn't agree more. The horse-collar penalty is already one that is being botched on a regular basis. Adams was being picked-on not only by Aaron Rogers and the Packers, but the refs as well. At some point you have to let the kid play the game without throwing a flag by default simply because they didn't complete the pass...

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:46 AM) Family got a toy poodle. (I like bigger dogs personally, but I can't deny the cuteness of the little guy) Other than my mother, I'm the only one who pretty much takes care of them/knows a thing about dogs. My family has always had huge breeds - Great Danes, Irish Wolfhounds, English Mastiffs. Recently, my grandmother has been living with my parents along with her shih tzu. Pretty funny seeing the shih tzu interact with the wolfhounds and mastiff. Now my mother has rescued a soft-coated wheaton terrier as well. It has opened my mind up to both big and small dogs...

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:38 AM) Excellent point. Also it is good to discipline them (take them to where they pee'd/poop'd at tell them no/bad dog/etc.. and hit them, doesn't have to be super hard, but they know you mean buisness) so they will think twice. Dogs are obviously very smart. I have a 5 month old myself. Yes he still slips up from time to time, but not nearly as much as he used to. When he slips up, he runs right to his dog cage cause he knows he f***ed up.. I also credit my other dog too (older) who shows him the ropes sort of speak. I.E. where to do his business at outside (amazing that I can let him out at 5 months in my backyard with no fences, etc.. and he does his business and heads right back into the house not worrying about him running away, pooping/peeing in the neighbors yard) not to walk in the living room, etc.. What kind of pup, SA?

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:36 AM) No, no treats. We trained her so that she knew that she could not go outside without ringing the bell. When we let her out, she pees within 10 sec and is ready to come back in. She seems like she must be really having to pee, I hope holding back her water outside of meals will help. Yeah, otherwise you may be looking at installing a doggie door....

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 01:27 AM) Does AMC show commercials? Yeah, but that's ok. I only watch it when I am working nights, and then I don't mind if a good movie drags on a bit longer, since late night programming is usually so limited.

Spy Game with Robert Redford and Brad Pitt is on AMC tonight. Easily one of my top 10 favorite movies. Such a high cool factor.

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 11:53 PM) That's probably a good point. Its out except 2 hours before bedtime. You think if I limited it to just her meals, she'd be peeing less? The thing is, she pees so little when she's outside, she's not unloading buckets of it. Hmm, interesting. Impessive that you got her to ring a bell, but that's probably not the route you needed to take. The key to house training is not just to train the dog to alert you when she might wish to go, but to learn to go only when she actually has to. The fact that she goes in the house if you ignore the bell does seem to suggest that she actually believes she has to go though. Any way you could use some of those indoor pads for her to urninate on until she can scale back a bit? I don't know what else to tell you...

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 11:33 PM) I have a puppy who is almost 7 months old. She originally was having trouble with her potty training but eventually taught her to ring a bell when she needed to go. The only problem is, she has to go pee literally every 45-60 minutes. When I let her out she does pee (not super long). Obviously at almost 7 months she should be able to hold her bladder for almost 7 hours, but clearly she can't. Anybody have any suggestions? When I ignore her ringing the bell she sneaks off to go pee upstairs. The vet also tested her urine, and found no infection. What do I do!? Are you leaving her water bowl out?

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 09:55 PM) This is a crimson herring, counsellor, even if it may be technically true. Steroids may not make someone a better ballplayer overall, but I don't think anyone other than the most hard core apologist could rationally deny a correlation between steroids and being a better home run hitter. No, steroids probably don't improve things like hand-eye coordination, timing, reflexes, or the ability to guess which pitch is coming. But of the many reasons why baseball's Jim Thomes and Frank Thomases have hit more home runs than its Freddy Pateks and Harry Chappases, comparative size and stength is one obvious and undeniable factor. Steroids build muscles that make you big and strong; big and strong guys may still need instrinsic talent to make solid contact, but big strong muscles, whether obtained in a gym or a lab, help them hit the ball harder and farther when they do. That's a matter of simple physics, not chemistry or biology. McGwire is delusional when he says the drugs don't diminish his totals (if he truly believes it, which I seriously doubt). Yeah, I'm sure he hit many upper deck shots that still would have cleared the fences by plenty, but we'll never know how many warning track fly balls went over the wall because of an extra measure of artificial oomph. The steroids users cheated, and broke the law in order to attain their unfair competitive edge. You make some good points, especially about MLB being tactily complicit and hypocritical, but imo, saying that the spitballers were worse is really stretching things. Au Contraire, good sir. The Cream and the Clear were known to increase fine motor skills, quickness, even vision, along with the other benefits such as improved strength and ability to recover more quickly from insane workout habits as well as injuries.

IMO, this issue is a hell of a lot more complicated than it ever gets credit for. You're talking about athletes who are paid based upon their performance relative to their peers. When some percentage of their peers are using PED's to improve their performances, it begins to affect the pay, as well as a host of other issues, of players who are staying clean. No more is this evident than with Frank Thomas, who no doubtedly has been shortchanged money, awards, and perhaps even postseason titles and awards due to the behavior of a group of a select few who chose to seek out an "edge." What would you have done? Do you stay clean and lose because others are being rewarded for cheating, or do you join in with the cheaters? Do you possible lose your ability to earn a livelihood by choosing to stay clean, or do you try to keep up with the Joneses' by taking PED's? General Managers, Owners, and MLB personnel should be taking a hell of a lot more heat for this than the players. As for guys like Mac, Bonds, ARod, they knew there was a risk when they cheated. Let's not feel too badly for them. They were rewarded with financial compensation for the risks they took with their bodies as well as their legacies.

I wonder if that explains why they have yet to sign a DH...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 10, 2010 -> 04:44 PM) I don't remember a week of football where I've seen as many overthrown footballs as I've seen these last 2 days. I liked when Theisman said yesterday that the Bengals' biggest problem was that "Carson Palmer is high right now." The FG kicking has been rather poor too. Sort of took the wind out of the sails of both the Bengals and the Patriots in their comeback attempts.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 8, 2010 -> 09:16 PM) The fact is everyone has a limit. To say Pods wouldn't have been available at the price he signed for if there were 2 teams involved, probably is correct. To say his price could easily have gone up to $8 million, most likely is wrong. That said, I shed no tears Pods is no longer a White Sox and actually am happy he will be patrolling CF for another Central Division foe. We aren't talking about a big time player here. Pods had zero suitors last year. He had to call to get a minor league job. To his credit he made the most of it, and I don't blame him for trying to get a boatload of money. The worst thing that can happen is the team could say no, which apparently they all did. The White Sox think paying Juan Pierre 2/$8 is a good idea. You're saying it's not a reasonable argument to say Scott could have gotten somewhere close to that?