iamshack

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 08:34 PM) Yikes, when did this board become the moral center of the world? Steve, I agree with you 99.9%. I wouldn't WISH death upon him, but i'm certainly not going to sit back and reflect on a "loss" society just suffered. Clean the gene pool of people like this I say. I love when people try to spin this "tragedy." If he was in the midst of attempting to kill someone, and got shot, would we all be saying "oh what a terrible tragedy! oh whoa is me! He was TRYING to turn his life around!" The fact is this guy was a waste of flesh, was a complete thug his entire 26 year life, STILL got paid millions and millions to play an f'n game, and (in all likelihood) was killed being a complete moron while attempting domestic violence. Where is the tragedy exactly? If Steve get's the douchiest post of the year, Chris Henry get's a Darwin Award. And how has no one commented on his girlfriends myspace post?! WTF is that?! How long does it take to type that out? As an attorney, you should know more than most that it's all about the way you phrase your argument or present your position.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 07:24 PM) Given how much money these players make and the pension/health care plans that they get, it's difficult for me to get upset at an organization for playing hardball with them on occasion. Oh, I agree. I'm not sympathizing with Cabrera here. All I am saying is that what the Sox did in regards to him last year was exploiting the rule in a manner which was not really envisioned when the rule was created. Due to the current economic conditions and by extension, the value of pre-arb players and draft picks has increased to a point which is higher than envisioned when the FA rule was created (at least in my opinion - obviously I wasn't there when it was). FA's should not be penalized in the marketplace such that it actually diminishes their ability to sign a lucrative contract.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 08:12 PM) Of course nobody gets a lifetime pass, or anything close to it. That said, I don't see why Ozzie or Kenny should be pushed out the door just yet (especially the latter, who is definitely in the top third of GMs in the league). While Greg Walker might be a different story, Ozzie and Kenny aren't the reasons why the Sox missed the playoffs in '07 and '09. One of the problems with setting a bar of "90 wins or else" in December is that we all have a rather crude idea of how things will shake out in the Central this year. Could anybody have predicted that the Wild Card would come out of the Central in '06, but that the defending champs would win 90 games and still miss the playoffs? What if the Central is mediocre, but Mark tears his labrum, Peavy takes a line drive to the face, and CQ separates his shoulder? A lot can happen in the next 9 1/2 months. I'm tempted to delete this post! I'll knock on wood instead...

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 06:44 PM) That's what agents are for. And, besides, when the Sox offered him arbitration, the economic landscape really hadn't taken hold at that point in the offseason. It wasn't known just how difficult it would be for some players to get jobs or to make the kind of money they would've made in prior years. People may have known it would be rough, but I'm not sure they knew just how rough. What the Sox did is not unethical. It's part of the game and if your team didn't try to take advantage of the system as it is, you probably wouldn't be happy about it. And it isn't as if there was no risk to the Sox. Cabrera would've been well within his rights to say, "fine, I'll take the deal." Again, his agent should've advised him of that. I agree with the first two points. To your last point, I said it was borderline unethical. If Cabrera accepts arbitration, and the White Sox do indeed bench him, you don't think that it could have rather large ramifications on the guy's career?

I'd like to add one more thing to this thread, and once again, I apologize in advance to anyone I may offend. Drugs are not the issue here. You can say Chris Henry was a terrible person because he drank too much, he did too much weed, maybe he snorted a little coke or smoked a little crack, we don't really know. But I know plenty of white guys that smoke weed all the time - we all do actually - and it is looked at in a completely different manner. I can guarantee you Charlie Sheen parties a hell of a lot harder than Chris Henry ever dreamed of partying, and yet, Charlie is a "fun" successful actor and Henry is labeled a "terrible" person. The key here, at least in my opinion, is the difference between growing up amongst poverty and violence (often times brought on by that poverty), and combining it with the drugs and alcohol. There is a complete double standard when it comes to the way people who use drugs and alcohol in this country are viewed, and it has nothing to do with the drugs or alcohol themselves. It's the socioeconomic conditions that interact with that drug and alcohol use that often determine how people view the people participating. There are countless examples of entertainers (actors, musicians, athletes, etc) that abuse drugs and alcohol, and as long as you do so in the right socioeconomic conditions (read wealthy), it's laughed at or celebrated even. Yet if you do so amongst the wrong socioeconomic conditions (read poor), you're troubled or terrible. Chris Henry was not a terrible person because he smoked weed and drank. He was a troubled or possibly even terrible person because he grew up amongst poverty and violence, and never learned how to rise above it. I don't think we should confuse the two.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 05:25 PM) But in terms of business, I think that's kind of a smart move on the Sox part. You tell a guy (Cabrera) you're offering arb but have every intention of letting the younger player take over the postion the follwoing year. You're being truthful to the player and at the same time, enticing him to decline arbitration which means you get picks. All the while knowing you will never have Cabrera play for you ever again anyway. That's just smart maneuvering. It's smart maneuvering, but it's borderline unethical given the current economic situation. By offering arbitration to a player in this economic climate, you make him somewhat undesirable as a FA because the team that signs him has to surrender an unprotected draft choice. This is fine and all, if you are trying to work within the spirit of the rules and keep the player for the betterment of your team. However, if you're doing it just because you know the player will eventually be signed and you'll receive a draft pick as compensation, all the while not wanting that player's services for your own team, well, that's a bit shady. I'm a gambling man, and so I like the move, but it's really sort of exploiting a weakness in the current system and economic conditions that was not meant to be exploited.

To be fair, wasn't the sexual assault allegation later retracted?

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 04:58 PM) No. Players aren't afraid to come here because of those two. In fact, you ever notice the only players that have anything bad to say about either of those two are players that weren't very good when they were here? If you believe players don't want to play here because of Ozzie and KW, you also have to believe they don't want to play in a city where you can get booed on opening day for going 0 for 4. And you're going to complain about benching players when they don't perform? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. Um, isn't sticking with underperfomring players something that most fans b**** about? Ordonez was totally different because the guy had some mysterious degenerative knee condition and was going to Austria to have it looked at, and he wouldn't let the Sox examine him for themsleves. Screw that, I wouldn't have wanted to pay him either. That's a lot of money to throw around. The real answer is more along the lines of the following: Edited for accuracy.

QUOTE (jhonnydanks @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 05:54 PM) Don't know about Mark, but I'll sure as hell take Heidi Don't Stop, get it get it

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 05:33 PM) huh? I think people pretty much hit the nail on the head about the Woods situation from the get go. Take a look at the posts in our thread about how it seemed like she smashed the window, domestic dispute etc etc. Oh, so when Tiger was reportedly hospitalized in an automobile accident on Thanksgiving evening your immediate reaction was that he's been f***ing half the single women in America? Well, pardon me, you're quite the omniscient SOB.

Ok. I apologize in advance to all those I am about to offend. I'm not going to be as heartless as Steve here, but let's keep things in perspective. This guy was chasing his fiance out of the house and then diving into the back of a moving pickup truck as she tried to get away from him. He was then reportedly beating on the rear window, apparently trying to break in to either assault her more, or scream at her, or who knows what. What if he had a knife? Or a gun? What if he threatened to kill her? We honestly don't know the particulars. If there is one thing that we should have all learned from the Tiger Woods debacle is things may not be what the initially seem. Before anyone starts canonizing this guy, or vilifying the guy, we should probably wait for more of the details to emerge. One thing I do know, is that we all like to forgive and forget all the bad things someone has done in their lifetime when they die, while as they live, we all feel free to judge and mock them all we like. If he had not been seriously injured, we would all be laughing our asses off at what a fool and an idiot Chris Henry is. If this was some random person, we would probably be doing it even if the guy did die. So while I don't necessarily think saying the guy "got what he deserved" is a particularly tactful thing to say, I think all of us participating in some mourning session because of the family he left behind is very disingenuous.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) Ding! It has nothing to do with not wanting to play for the Sox. Everyone thinks EVERY player wants to play for Boston and the NYY...why is that? Well, because those teams pay prime DOLLARS + they are also competitive. If the Sox field a competitive team (which we most often do) and paid what the Bankees paid (which they never do) then we'd be in the mix for every damn free agent we wanted. The Sox are playing from a different business model and that model says we will NOT be able to sign CC Sabathia, Mark Texeira or AJ Burnett in one off season, let alone all 3 of them. The Cubs will pay good money, but they are stupid so you can't put them into the mix with the Red Sox and Yanks I think for the most part money does do most of the talking, but when we're talking about established veteran players who already have banked tens of millions of dollars throughout their careers, they usually go places where they have a chance to win. Now that's not saying that if the Yankees offered $2 million, and the Pirates offered $10 million, that player would not choose the Pirates, but if the numbers are anywhere close to the same ballpark, the veteran player usually chooses the team he feels has a better chance of winning.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 04:54 PM) Using the Bill James 2010 projections and Pinto's lineup analysis tool i have a lineup of Pierre, Beckham, Q, Konerko, Jones, Rios, AJ, Ramirez, and Teahen pegged for 5.057 Runs per game. The site seems to think our optimal lineup would be good for about 5.157 runs and would be Beckham, Konerko, Ramirez, Q, Rios, Teahen, Jones, A.J., Pierre. Regardless, we really do need a bigger bat in the middle of our lineup. Interesting stuff, indeed! Paulie in the 2-hole would be great! TBolt, does this Pinto thing take into account footspeed? Or just their offensive numbers basically? I do like the sound of 5.157 runs a game though. One would think with this pitching staff, we should win a lot of games when we score 5 runs...

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 09:08 AM) Should have been Obama. Noble Peace prize, Person of the Year, Greatest Person to Have Lived Since Jesus - all much deserved praise. (half kidding) Obama was one of the finalists, actually. He won this award last year.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 03:13 PM) The A's won the division in 2006. Just a small point, but worth noting. Ahh, good catch.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 01:23 PM) Chicago is a large Japanese market that has had a few Japanese players who have came and said nothing but good things about the place. They are the 3rd largest market in the world as well. And the Sox have a tremendous pitching staff. The Angels have lost Lackey, Texeira, K-Rod, and Figgins in two years time and have had a horrendous off-season to date. Yes they play in a poor division, but I'd be hard pressed to see many experts that wouldn't say the Sox have as good of a shot as the Angels this year. Well, I'll agree to disagree. I think LA/Anaheim is a more attractive option for most free agents than the South Side, and in Matsui's case, there is a far bigger asian population in SoCal than in Chicago. I think all things being even, he would have chosen LA over here 10 times out of 10.

QUOTE (striker @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 01:40 PM) I posted on thesportingnews.com yesterday that I think Hoyer should try and extend Gonzalez. Accelerate his salary. Instead of $5M the next couple years he gets 2010 $15M 2011 $15M 2012 $20M 2013 $20M 2014 $25M He's a franchise player and those don't come around that often. You would strengthen your fan base too. SD fans probably hate the thought of trading him even if it means good players in return. If Hoyer does trade him I would ask for Lester and Buckholz. They want one of my best young players? They have to give me one of theirs. They don't have the money to do that. That's why Peavy is on our team right now, because they were forced to cut payroll to $40 million. Even if they could do that, they'd be giving him $19.5 million over the next few years over what his contract states, making the deal you're proposing basically a 3-year, $85 million dollar deal. Those are ARod numbers. He's got to put together a about 3-4 more seasons like last year before he can even discuss that kind of money.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 11:12 AM) I hear you, but how many times have you ever seen a team do that? Even teams with a good defensive backup and a big bat starting catcher never seem to put them both in the lineup. Pretty sure the Indians used to do it with VMart and Shoppach?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 11:24 AM) The White Sox were one of very few teams Hideki looked at. And we don't even know if the Sox actually make an offer for Matsui. Clearly there was interest in both sides and Matsui had an interest in playing in Chicago. I think if the two clubs made similar offers, Matsui would be a White Sox and not an Angel. Why would he want to come here as opposed to the Angels, who have won their division and made the playoffs for the last 5 years? Especially after seeing the success his former teammate Bobby Abreu had with the Angels? Is this inside info, Jason?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 12:08 AM) Ranked #8 in the Rangers organization in 2006. #9 in 2007. He wasn't great, but he was at least decent. He was drafted in the 46th round, so he kind of came out of nowhere. Oh, my bad. Crap. I am having a bad day around here today...

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 12:05 AM) At one point, Botts looked like a decent prospect. Correct me if I'm wrong, but at one point, he was one hell of a prospect, wasn't he?

Guys, he's f***ing with you.

He may not be left with much of a choice. But point taken.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 11:46 PM) Hopefully with the slappy leadoff guy in the fold, we don't handcuff Beckham into being passive while we wait for Pierre to steal. The entire purpose of Beckham being in the 2 hole is to see good pitches and to drive the ball into the gaps. I don't want to see Beckham turned into a bunting machine or just giving it up to move the runner. Beckham has a much higher ceiling and this year should be about him crushing pitches being protected by a hopefully rejuvenated Quentin. Watching him take crushable pitches waiting for Pierre to steal is going to be a waste. At that point I would rather move Beckham down to say 6th to get more out of him. Or just bat him 3rd.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Dec 17, 2009 -> 12:41 AM) Except swapping Taylor for Wallace...wtf? Yeah, lame, but they needed the CI bat much more than another OF...