BearSox

no one has yet to explain to me why this outlandish story about Sinclair and Obama has been buried, but an even more outlandish story about McCain and a "platonic" relationship with a lobbyist was front page news. There is no question that both of these stories should have been buried, but if McCain's was front page, why wasn't this Sinclair crap front page?

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 02:44 PM) aka, I'm bat s*** crazy. polygraph's are very unreliable. They judge by your heart rate, blood pressure, etc. However, the factors they use to tell if you are lying or not can be increased by other things as well, leading to false results.

I am not claiming Obama did any of this. In fact, I doubt it. My main point in this thread was actually the complete bias by the main-stream media, and how they are willing to cover up anything Obama. If this Sinclair guy claimed this crap with McCain or even Hillary, you can bet your ass this would have been covered a whole lot more. I post the reverse speech, and other stuff to not prove he was telling the truth, but rather there are still plenty of questions out there, and this should be getting some coverage.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 02:33 PM) Oh and, if the MSM is covering it up supposedly... why is a major newspaper your first citation? you got me there... 1 site! and Reverse Speech is much more reliable then lie detectors.

Supposedly he failed the first one, but I have also read that the first "doctor" who administrated the 1st polygraph doesn't even have a fully credited PHd. Also, they only said "deception" was present. Deception in what? Also, reverse speech has found there to be no "deception" with Larry Sinclair and that he is telling the truth, and that Obama has been the one lying... http://www.reversespeech.com/sinclairpoly.htm Plus, why haven't the results of the 2nd polygraph been released?

I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but this man Larry Sinclair claims that back in 1999, he and Obama did cocaine together and that Sinclair preformed oral sex on Obama. This guy even took a polygraph test, and passed it! (made 20 G's in the process as well). Here's a link from about a month ago: http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/4766 Obviously this is a bit crazy, and there is no proof Obama did any of this, but I haven't seen Obama deny it or take a polygraph test. Actually, the biggest thing about this is how the whole main-stream media has covered most of this up. How does McCain's suppossed "platonic" relationship with a lobbyist without any proof or reliable sources make the front page of a newspaper and get covered all over... but Obama's suppossed relationship with Sinclair, and the guy says it happened, not get covered at all? Discuss.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 10:36 AM) What if it would have been one of your whipping boys? Would you have been so understanding? I am very pleased with what Ramirez has shown so far, but defensively he leaves a lot to be desired. The play should have been made. It's a tough play. I'm not gonna chew someone out who couldn't make a tough play, whether I like them or not. It was a tough play, and Ramirez should be the last one blamed for those 2 runs that scored. He gave it all and couldn't come up with it. Defensively, Ramirez has been fine this spring.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 09:22 AM) Oh come on. Ramirez should have made that play. He overran the ball. It should have been caught and he never even got leather on it. Could the play have been made, probably. But running full speed and trying to stop all your momentum and catch that ball (which the wind effected as well) is not an easy play at all. So, I do not blame Ramirez for those 2 runs, nor would I blame any other 2B for those two runs if they couldn't come up with the ball.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 04:02 PM) Did you happen to see the pop up Ramirez let drop yesterday? Cost the team 2 runs. Crede hit over .280 with 30 homers in 2006. He was hitting over .300 with 28 homers in August when his back locked up worse than normal. He's healthy now. No hit is not a good description. oh come on, are you being serious about that pop up? That ball was in no-man's land. You can't blame anyone for that.

They all should be killed and hung like Mussolini...

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 10:46 PM) POWER!!! WE NEED POWER!!!!! It has little to do with power but the fact Owens sucks.

oh man, I don't know about you guys, but I had a fantastic Easter Dinner... Happy Easter all!

Dye has slowed down to speed of a crippled old man since 06, it looks like. Whenever I see him fielding, it looks like I accidentally hit the slow-mo button on the tivo. And at bat, it looks like he is swinging a piece of sagging baloney. I really disliked the deal we gave him at the time, and I would not be surprised to see Dye have a repeat performance from last year's miserable 1st half. We should have really let him go for a couple draft picks, IMO.

Owens is probably the only person who steps back and swings in all of baseball. I've seen people step back to load up and then step forward again, but Owens steps in and stays there, and gives a little girl hack at the ball. No wonder why he can't hit for power, he doesn't know how to actually bat. Owens shouldn't be anything more then a pinch runner and emergency OF. Anderson or Ramirez should play CF vs. lefties all the time, and vs. righties most of the time as well.

after seeing Brian Anderson the past couple of days, he can become a decent player. He fixed his stance and swing, and it has worked wonders for him. The funny thing is, why didn't anyone tell within the organization tell him this 2 years ago? I'm no BA fan boy, but he is our best option in CF, and he can be decent if he continues to learn. If we're lucky, I think he can turn into a lesser version of Mike Cameron within a year or two. But that is dependent on if he has really matured and is willing to spend a good majority of his time just focusing on baseball.

He has always hit lefties really well... but he is nothing more then a platoon player. And we don't have anyone to platoon him with.

Okay, I was thinking about the opening day lineup, and I have come to a couple of conclussions and what should be the opening day lineup... Ozuna will start at 2B. Supposedly he had been already named the starter at 2B, plus, he has always hit C.C. pretty good. We will also stack the lineup w/ righties against Sabathia, so that means no Owens. CF will be either Anderson or Ramirez. I say go with Ramirez since he is a great fastball hitter and because the Indians and Sabathia know little about him as well, and how to pitch to him. Pierzynski will start, mainly because he calls a better game then Hall, and lefty or righty, he is a much better hitter then Hall. Also, I'd hope that by opening day, both Uribe and Crede will be gone, especially Crede, which will allow Fields to start at 3B. Ideally, the batting order would go as the following: 1. Ozuna, 2B 2. Cabrera, SS 3. Swisher, LF 4. Thome, DH 5. Konerko, 1B 6. Dye, RF 7. Fields, 3B 8. Pierzynski, C 9. Ramirez, CF I went with Swisher batting 3rd because he is a much better hitter vs. lefties then he is vs. righties, and we should use his ability to get on base to our advantage. Having him hitting 3rd with Thome hitting cleanup gives us a chance to get runners on, especially early, for Konerko, Dye, and even possibly Fields. I really feel strongly about setting the tone early, and this lineup would give us the best chance to do so, especially against a tough lefty like Sabathia.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 22, 2008 -> 07:44 PM) What does that directly have to do with what type of player Owens is? He isn't responsible for making the lineup, the coaching staff is. In this case, he is doing what he is told. Is it the wrong decision? I think so, along with many others, but thats to fault Owens. It's like the Mack situation in 2006. He wasn't a CF, but was put there time and time gain because Ozzie and Co. felt like they didn't have any options. Numerous fans were upset with Mack, but it wasn't his fault he was in a spot he shouldn't be. I am not a Jerry Owens fan. The tools that have been provided to him aren't enough to make him an above average baseball player. Thats not to say he can't still make an impact on a team in the right role. To say that a 27 year old that posted a .396 OBP in the final month of the season last year, and has carried that over into ST has no business playing professional baseball of any kind is a stretch of pretty epic proportions That's funny, cause I never said that. I said some could make the case, and I could see that since he just isn't a baseball player. But I think he could be valueable on a team, such as a poor man's version of Brian Roberts of the 04 Red Sox. Also, the part about Ozzie and Kenny had nothing to do with Owens but rather them, and how it is looking like they are going to make quite a few of boneheaded decisions regarding the roster, as of now. I just hope they come to their senses and realize that Owens isn't a starter or leadoff hitter.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 22, 2008 -> 07:28 PM) You really need a lesson in not taking things to the extreme so god damn much. It makes the board look bad. It's not taking things to the extreme if they are true. He has speed, and that is the only reason why he is even being looked at for a spot. He doesn't know how to hit, he doesn't know how to read flyballs, and he has quite possibly the weakest arm in the MLB, or at least the weakest arm of any OF in the majors. I could see a team having him as a pinch runner and emergency OF, but if KW and Ozzie really are going to make him the starter at CF and be the leadoff hitter, they need to have their heads examined. Well, KW and Ozzie need their heads examined for quite a few reasons actually.

I'm afraid to say it, but Podsednik is probably a better baseball player then Owens. And that's sad. Owens shouldn't be anything more then a backup and pinch runner, and thats it. Hell, some can make the case that the guy doesn't even belong in professional baseball.

I remember I got my first hit in little league with my eyes closed. Line drive right up the middle, and I didn't even see it.

We'd be better off DFA'ing both Crede and Uribe by the beginning of the year then actually having them take away AB's from Fields and Ramirez.

QUOTE(dwalteroo @ Mar 22, 2008 -> 12:52 AM) I like Brian Anderson. I watched him hit 2 HRs off Felix, and thought he was the next big thing and then some. He still could be - he has a ton of natural talent, and his defense is top notch. But he needs to learn how to handle anything inside. Big time. well, last year he couldn't hit anything inside because for some dumbass reason he was standing straight up at bat, with no bend, and right on top of the plate.

My conclusion from this spring is: While I am not fond of Brian Anderson and I don't think he is much, he is worlds better then Owens. Owens sometimes makes the great diving catch laying out, but he still doesn't know how to read fly balls, and I am almost positive I have a stronger arm then him. In the 1st inning of the game vs. SF, he horribly misplayed what should of been an out, and turned it into a triple, and when throwing it in, he tossed a rainbow to the cutoff man. And even on his diving catch, he almost blew the DP by throwing away the ball. He couldn't get the ball from where he was standing to 2B on a straight line from no more then 100 ft. at the most. Plus, he has no f***ing clue what he's doing up there at bat, and has the worst swing on the team. Vazquez has a better swing and approach then Owens does. Owens should not be anything more then a pinch runner in the majors, if that. Right now Brian Anderson is our best option at CF.

I do not know if people realize this, but if Fields spends and wastes this year at AAA, that could really f*** up his career. He needs to get MLB AB's, and he needs to start from opening day, period.