Texsox

QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 21, 2005 -> 08:39 AM) Without it, does she die... ? That's how I define LS. And I don't see how anyone could disagree. However, someone who is a paraplegic, also needs assistance to eat and drink. Did you consider Christopher Reeves to be "on life support"? He could not feed himself.

When Mark comes back, it will be interesting is KW keeps singing "don't worry about salary, play the best guy" song he told Ozzie will Harris. It probably isn't worth speculating now, wait until Mark is ready and see who is shining and who is struggling, then let the debate begin.

QUOTE(TheDybber @ Mar 21, 2005 -> 10:54 AM) Bruce Pearl is on the same level as Linda Tripp. Why wasn't he, or the Iowa team, put on probation for illegally wiretapping a recruit? Isn't that entrapment? Sorry Dick, but Bruce Pearl, good coach or not, is not a martyr, not a do gooder, he is a rat, plain and simple. In most states it is legal to tape record conversations you are in. That is very different than wiretapping, which is listening in and/or recording conversations you are not a party to. One link If it is an interstate call, the federal law would cover it. Wow, I get to dust off some of my old journalism training. \

E-Lo is #4 on the Nationals starting depth chart. Who would have guessed a guy who finished second in the Cy Young voting a couple years ago would be at the ass end of the National's bench? Jon Rauch is listed as coming out of the pen. Red's a good color for him.

QUOTE(Y2HH @ Mar 21, 2005 -> 10:47 AM) I'll pass on Cotts until he develops more reliable pitches than a short-armed fastball. Cotts is not the answer, it takes hitters less than one at bat to figure out he will throw that fastball in a pinch, and they will knock it over the centerfield concourse when it happens. This lands on Bmac, and if not Bmac, Hermanson. -y2 AAA would be the place to develop more reliable pitches.

QUOTE(JimH @ Mar 21, 2005 -> 10:42 AM) Since it looks like Buehrle will definitely miss all of April, I'm happy they didn't trot out the lame "we'll just go with a 4 man rotation" line. They should still pick somebody up (a starter) who's willing to pitch at AAA, you can never have enough depth and freak injuries prove it. In about 10 days, there will be some guys available. If any of Garcia-Contreras-Garland-Hernandez-BMac have problems they'll need a guy. Sox are deep in bullpen fill ins but not starters. Another route is stretching Cotts out. We still have a couple starters that have shown AAA flash in the system.

I would like to nominate this for the worst thread of the year. Just a thought on rotation. Why not pitch B-Mac in the first series? Give him the #3 spot. He's the hottest arm we have. I hope this Oh s*** moment doesn't cause him to start thinking and tinkering. He needs to keep is 20 year old head on straight. I'm drinking the koolaid and think Dontrell time He needs to practice this phrase I never wanted to make the team this way. I hope Mark returns quickly and completely. Until then I just want to help the team and pitch well when they hand me the ball.

f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f*** f***

:fyou

Breaking my heart

Sues town for not acting on protection order

Here is what the San Jose Mercury News thinks about Buerhle as an Ace. They must have been reading our boards

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 08:04 PM) My parents have made each other and the three of us promise to not leave them on life supports if there is no chance for any improvement. To be honest, they don't want it at all for any reason. For my mom, it had to do with what happened with her parents. This is a great time to clarify what life support means. Some consider a ventilator "life support" this is a feeding tube. I would not disagree with anyone who calls this "life support" but I could see some people not necessarily meaning a feeding tube as life support.

I think we are different, not better. We will need a couple breaks, pitching stays healthy, Frank returns quickly and at 100%, balls bounce the right way, etc. I could write a prediction finishing 1-3 possibly even 4. The problem I have with a 3 or 4th place finish is it presupposes that Cleveland and Detroit have leapfrogged us. I do not see it. I think we easily kept pace with Cleveland and Detroit had a longer way to go. Spring Training is too damn long. Let's count them.

Reminds me of a Farside Cartoon Shark: hmmm, soft and chewy on the outside, crunchy in the middle.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 03:44 PM) But you can't pass a law to retroactively change a ruling. This bill would do just that. It would erase six years of legal proceedings and start with no history. It's as if the last six or seven years of legal wrangling to get this point would have never existed. If they'll do it in this situation, when else would they do this? But don't new laws always do that? They just enacted legislature to allow drilling in ANWR. That's been kicking around forever and with court rulings. Whenever a law is ruled unconstitutional the legislative branch has an opportunity to review and change the law to fit. This wouldn't change the ruling, it would require a new ruling. Some want her to die, some to live. If they replace the feeding tube, both sides will eventually get what they want. One side will keep her alive and under the care of her parents, the pro-death crowd will eventually get their wish also.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 02:11 PM) From todays Washington Post article on the Schiavo thing. Another side question: Is it appropriate to obviate the constitution and erase a judicial decision because the Congress doesn't agree with it? Yes, that is our system. The legislature enacts laws, the judicial branch interprets them. When judges rule against a certain situation, enacting a new law is exactly what they should do. But only after screaming about activist judges for several days.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 11:50 AM) Tex: I didn't make this judgment. Doctor after doctor did. Court after court did. I wish that the parties involved in this fight could get into a reasonable solution in either case instead of enlisting politicians to wrap themselves up in her sickbed for political gain. I agree 100% with you. It is very unfortunate that we have to make this judgement. I hope we elected the types of people we would want making this decision for us. I can not fathom standing by and watching a human being dehydrate and not give them water? We wouldn't kill a convicted mass murderer that way. Yet that is the fate that this poor woman is going through. Miracles happen. Some doctors believe with continues therapy, there is hope. Keeping things as they were keeps her alive. Killing her helps no one except the person that wants her dead. But, hey that's just the conservative in me.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) I've decided to be completely fair about this so I'm compiling a list. I'm taking the top 30 in NPERA amongst starters & assigning reverse pt values. If you ranked #1 = 30 pts, & ranked #30 = 1 pt. Then it's simply a matter of totaling the pts for each player over the past 4 yrs. That will give you an ACE ranking so to speak. IMHO, trying to put a numerical score on "ace", is like trying to define a beautiful sunset. In the end, it is in the opinion of the speaker. If you need numerical justification to call or not call someone an ace, go for it. Like pornography, most people know it when they see it.

Jugg I agree with most everything, except the same league requirement. Randy Johnson is an Ace in either league. I cannot fathom a list of aces that wouldn't include him. For that matter, Roger Clemens was an Ace last year, even though he switched leagues. But this is really all about semantics. There is no written criteria, and each person will draw the line in a different place. If we are going to place a linquistic label without a set criteria, then the answer is probably more linquistic than mathematical. When I think of ace, the pitcher must be the guy you want in Game 7. The guy you want on the mound to stop a three or four game team skid. The guy who the other pitchers look to and emulate. It's about attitude as much as won loss records, era, and the stuff thats stats heads will bring up. The guy who doesn't have three bad outings in a row. The guy with both quality wins and "quality" loses. Is Buehrle an ace? I believe he's as close as we get right now. If someone wants to call him an Ace, I'd would not disagree, but I'm not quite ready to. I think this will be the year of Mark and in October, we will be calling him an Ace and the best in the A.L.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 08:42 AM) He pursued an aggressive course of therapy for five years. With no improvement, and according to every medical professional who has reviewed this that I've seen, no chance of improvement. If she's in a perpetual vegetative state with no hope of improvement, why would you try to get her further therapy? I agree that some treatments have proven to be of no help at this point, but who would consider taking her outside as an aggressive course of therapy? I disagree that there is no hope for her improvement. Just look at her parents and the tens of millions of people who want her to not dehydrate to death. There are medical experts on both sides with different opinions. Why are people so quick to want to see her die? If she is in a perpetual vegetative state, then she isn't being harmed by the care. If she isn't in a perpetual state, and we stop feeding and giving her water, she will be harmed. Who is harmed by keeping her alive? Who is helped by her dying?

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 10:51 PM) Yes and no. At the right price, you should take chances. That might be a shy attitude, but you shouldn't spend big bucks on a huge gamble. That's what I'd consider one of Kenny's positives, is that he takes some gambles on guys, not huge risks, but some nice rewards if they pan out. Uribe, Schoenwies (first half '04), Loaiza, etc -- all examples. And, yes, stars will ultimately get the big bucks -- which I'm not against. I just want the Bears to give the big bucks to 'the right guy' -- I don't feel Konerko is the right guy to be making $10 million plus on this team. I agree that the White Sox need to take gambles, which brings me back full circle. The gamble is the Sox need to pay a guy $2mil for a $5 season. Or extented out $5 mil for a $10 mil season. They can't seem to pay a guy $10 mil for a $10 mil season, and certainly can't pay $10 mil for a $5 mil season or worse. What you get with expensive guys is consistency. Who is the base you are building on? The Sox, being a small market team, must build a base with the Credes of the world and hope for a Loiza to come along. The teams that are in the playoffs every year build a base with guys like (pre-injury) Maggs, Lee, Konerko, Thomas and then go out and fill in missing pieces. How would you like to have Pods and Lee competing for a position? Pierz and Olivo? So I mention again, I'm bored with the process. Knowing this will be the future of the franchise. Build around average players, hope for a couple breakout seasons, be oh so close.

QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 01:19 AM) According to the web site run by her parents the malpractice suit was paid out in 1998, and since near $450K has been paid to medical facilities and to lawyers with fees in excess of $200K still due. MHO, I think they should let her pass. Just basing that on what I would want. I, no matter how much my parents would want it, would not want to be such a burden. As well.. they are not medical professionals and could not care for me alone. The cost, I imagine, has got to be extreme. I agree that I would not want to be a burden like that to my parents. I also watched my parents bury my little brother and I wouldn't want that either. If it was their wishes to keep me alive, I would rather they have the choice. It's a shame that so many resources that could be used for her care, instead are being paid to attorneys. She is in a hospice facility which is not as expensive as a nursing home and she does not require any extrordinary or specific medical care. She breathes on her own, heart beats fine on it's own, she just needs help eating. An issue that has not been brought up is care after the parents die. There is the possibility she could outlive them, that is unless the death penalty is carried out. I am certain if it comes down to a money to keep her alive, the tens of millions of Americans that are praying for her to be spared death by dehydration, would come through and donate enough money to keep her alive. And if they are going to allow her to die. At least make it as gently as we would a serial murderer, not slow and torturous. And any guesses why the husband has denied any therapy? Denied permission for the hospice staff to take her outside? Denied any and all efforts to help this lady beyond what he is legally mandated to do?

For those of you using Outlook, Palm Desktop, and other PIM and would like to have the complete Sox schedule loaded, Click Here Back to your regular programming. Tip: You may wish to turn off the reminder before importing. It does import it as an event with time.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 06:14 PM) As far as Uribe and Rowand, I'd like to think that we can lock them up early, rather than doing what we've done with Konerko and Maggs these past two years (waiting till the contract year). Keep them on with the three year contracts, and anywhere between the second year and the beginning of the third year, work hard at extending these guys, especially if they're still producing well and being exceptional at what they're exceptional at (defense, slugging, etc), give them what they're worth. One can overpay a little bit, but not to the point where it will take away in other areas. I half agree with your statement about building and replacing players with better players. There's areas where you could say that's true (Lee>>>>Pods), but there's also areas where you could say that isn't true (I'd much rather have Pierzynski over Olivo, Olivo hasn't done much in his career). Ideally, over the next couple of years, we'll have an influx of good young players that will replace some of our older guys, and we're able to really cash in at other positions because this young, cheap talent coming up. Unfortunately, when you haven't won a WS in almost 90 years, it's going to be as far from ideal as possible. All excellent points. I would rather have Pierz but that wasn't the trade. We went Olivo for Ben Davis to shore up pitching, which was my point. I would prefer Olivo to Davis, but to get Garcia, we needed to drop back in another position. Would you agree then that we are in the position of needing to gamble on talent, then pay for proven? Further, isn't a proven track record why stars are paid what they are?