caulfield12

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:59 PM) [/b] Are you a fan, or a masochistic voyeur? I don't understand how one can claim to be such a hardcore fan, but constantly revel in everything negative. Because suffering with the White Sox (68-76, 78-82, 84 to the most exciting team, the one in the final year of old Comiskey Park) is a family birthright. It's something that you can't run away from or turn your back on, no matter how frustrated or aggravated you get.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:55 PM) And yet you come back every morning to remind us that. Seriously, what is your issue? Why is it that some of you absolutely seem to thrive when this baseball team is playing like horses***? Because every game offers renewed HOPE that things will change...and no game is exactly the same as any other that has happened in the history of the game. I could quote from James Earl Jones' "bleacher" speech to Annie in Field of Dreams but I'll spare myself citing it at the moment.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:54 PM) So why waste your time if you aren't getting any enjoyment out of this, and you have no expectations? 1) See answer from Fathom, same exact reason. 2) I will shift more towards being excited about success from our minor league prospects and maybe the possibility that KW makes the right move again when/if he starts trading. 3) Being a White Sox fan means you have to stick with every season (well, not 2007) from beginning 'til end. Always.

Of course the Cubs are winning, too. What else could go wrong...will go wrong. An injury is probably next, lol.

QUOTE (jeffro2525 @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:49 PM) I love how people get on here on their soap box/high horse..."we're winning. Why are people so negative"...screw them. Obviously they don't watch this team enough. God Damnit!!!!!!!!! If you have watched this team at all YOU KNOW WHATS COMING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GOD DAMNIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Exactly. I've been a Sox fan for too long (since 1970's) long enough to see the writing on the wall with this team's abysmal start. We'll hear 16-24 (83 start) and how we went on to win the division by nearly 30 games and ended at 99-63 or whatever, but that's NOT HAPPENING THIS YEAR.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:45 PM) Jesus Christ dude...you are like the f***ing Grim Reaper. Yes, I caused that to happen becaues I'm on the field. If the players EXPECT to fail like they seemingly do, why should I be optimistic??? That would be pretty stupid.

But then with a split, you risk the wild pitch or PB. Santos would be my pick, clearly, Pena 2nd. But Pena went yesterday....one hit away from "goodbye pitching your a-- off for the win Danksie." This type of loss could really be the death blow in the early season psyche of this club. Have to get this one, it's simple...anything else is a disaster.

I don't care about match-ups anymore, if I'm Guillen, I go to Santos or Pena over Williams. Probably not Putz, his stuff is too much like Linebrink's...about 85-90% of the pitcher he was b4 the injury.

You can't throw 85% FB's at 92-94 over and over again with this Yankees' line-up. EPIC FAIL.

Linebrink pitching too cautiously, like he's a bit gunshy to let go with a fastball over the center of the plate. Farmer hyping up Liney's FB, how he's at 94 this year vs. 88-91 MPH in 2009.

Williams here against Gardner? Santos? Pena?

Linebrink at 90-93. Have yet to see the 92-95 MPH fastball consistently...maybe he's letting up a bit more in an effort to get better command/control in the zone after working with Cooper?

Wow....goes against convention with Linebrink instead of Williams here. Maybe Ozzie's learning?

QUOTE (kane0730 @ May 1, 2010 -> 01:29 PM) When we need him to retire, he signs an extention. I swear, the next big Sox news will be Kotsay and Vizquel signing extensions (with salary bumps and incentives built in) through the 2012 season.

Big dilemma. Williams against two lefties in the bottom of the 6th? Or Matt Thornton 2 innings too early, in the Zumaya-esque extended two inning appearance a day after being nicked by the Yankees the night before, in a day game? No good options for Ozzie.

When we need a fly ball from Pierre for an RBI, we get a ground ball to P/3B/1B, foul out, DP or K. When we need him to slap the ball and beat it out, he flies out. When we need him to run fast and beat out a play at first, he doesn't have that "burst" or extra gear to shift into anymore.

Great job by Danks, what new?

110 and counting. All "high stress" pitches.

Proverbial rock and a hard place for Ozzie. Pull Danks now? I don't think so.

"Mark Teahan is a good/solid defender. "Plus" arm on the scoutng scale over at third. He's the least of our problems." Buddy Bell (and 1/3rd of the posters here)

Fine, nobody can talk about Jon Danks when his pitch count hits 130+ or they will be flamed... BTW, my talking about Danks makes a lot more sense than KW stressing in his reality show that we'll be bringing in a lot of high OBP guys...when he did exactly the opposite.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 1, 2010 -> 02:02 PM) What does Danks pitch count have to do with Omar Vizquel? WHAT THE ---- ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ISN'T THIS A GAME THREAD? SO NOW WE CAN'T POST WITHOUT REFERRING TO A SPECIFIC PREVIOUS POSTERS' QUOTATION. PEOPLE HERE ARE REALLY LOSING IT.

Danks nearing high 80's in pitch count. Looks like he will only get through five to be in a position to turn it over to pen...six if he's VERY VERY economical with his pitches next inning. What's the +/- with Danks' pitch count before everyone starts laying into Ozzie for endangering the most important player in our organization arguably?

At least we're not paying Vazquez $10-15 million. We can only whine and complain about Peavy's deal for now.

Am in Xi'an China at 243 AM at net bar. Well, at least if we lose, I get to see the amazing TERRA COTTA warriors today no matter what and won't let it ruin my day!!! YAY! I was actually pretty shocked (upon logging onto computer to see) we were leading yesterday and today....only slightly more than I was shocked to see Thornton was the one who gave up the lead. Beckham, what's going on with you?