gatnom

Beckman has several good recruits and a lot of very solid ones. Considering the amount of negativity surrounding the program was on the level of a Soxtalk game thread when he took over, I'd say that Beckman can recruit a bit. Star ratings aren't everything.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Aug 17, 2012 -> 02:13 AM) Er, not quite. He was academically qualified to get into the school...and then flunked summer school once he got there. It seems kind of convenient to me. The link you posted earlier said that he just "didn't meet the requirements," which consist of basically being academically qualified and having the Faculty Sponsorship Subcommittee agree that you can enter. Maybe he actually did fail in summer school, but something about the whole situation seems fishy to me. I mean it's not like a scholarship athlete is actually held to the same standards as a normal student. I'm mostly just trying to take a jab at you IU fans, though

So he's academically qualified, but he wasn't good enough to get into Indiana. And, you say that Crean gave out one too many scholarships? Hmm...

QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 31, 2012 -> 10:41 PM) In 2011, Arron Afflalo's TS% was 62% and his 3P% was 42% amd his FG% was nearly 50%. But you know, Arron Afflalo is not taking over any games, and neither is Harden. These are guys you want to get if you happen to think Derrick Rose should still be the focal point of our offense, they aren't guys you get if you think Derrick should ease back and get a break once in awhile. They're guys who benefit off the drive and kick, just like every other player we have now. They aren't guys you toss the ball to and say "Here, create. Carry the offense." Don't get me wrong, we'd definitely be better with Harden or Afflalo playing the 2 if money somehow wasn't an issue and we could just plug them in. But they aren't guys who have ever shown themselves capable of carrying a team. I just think we need that other guy. I guess I don't understand how you envision Derrick Rose to be anything other than the focal point of the Bulls' offense. He is who he is.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jul 22, 2012 -> 04:39 PM) There should have been a I Dislike him, but go Sox option. It wasn't worded the best, but that is basically the first option.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 22, 2012 -> 03:47 PM) he's a tool and i hate him as a person and a player. won't root for him to do well, but as a GM, and from a purely baseball perspective, KW made a good move. I agree with this.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 20, 2012 -> 04:29 PM) The voice acting of Batman in the cartoon series is so much better than the Bale's Batman impersonation. It's one of the things that makes me take the movie not so seriously. I don't know why, but it made me think of a lower pitched skeletor. The first time he talked in the movie I actually laughed out loud. Overall, I agree with the Ebert review.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 11:02 PM) is it possible to have an easier home conference schedule within the Big 10? Of course they get killed on the road conference schedule. Yeah, to have Illinois visiting you.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 12:27 PM) Maybe not. But the real question is what value in prospects is worth 10 outings of the current MLB ERA leader. How many more wins does that equate to over somebody else we might run out there? Because that's all we're getting in exchange for whoever we give up. I was trying to look at it from the Cubs' perspective. I think that Dempster would be a pretty huge upgrade over Axelrod for us, and I would do the aforementioned deal in a heartbeat. All of our top prospects are outfielders, and we have a pretty set outfield for the next few years regardless. Acquiring Dempster makes us a legit postseason threat, imo. I just don't think the deal makes sense for the Cubs.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 12:13 PM) Mitchell is a much better prospect than many people on the board recognize. I think some of the hate is due to him being picked before Trout. Time to let this go... 20 something teams made the same mistake. It wasn't just us. Meanwhile, people look at Mitchell's .247 batting average this season and trash him without recognizing he also has a .373 OBP and .824 OPS. Personally, I think we're going to see a big jump in performance from him next year. He's got a freakish combination of speed and power for a CF. Or, it could be his 29.9% k% in AA. I don't disagree that he's a good prospect. I just don't think that he alone right now is worth the current MLB ERA leader.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 11:55 AM) If the Sox had Dempster, a free-agent-to-be in 2.5 months, and had one of the worst records in baseball, and with no compensation coming for his exit... I think you'd be a lot more upset if the Sox didn't trade him at all. Or you should be. If I'm not mistaken, teams only do not get compensation for players that they have had for less than 1 year.

If the Sox were trading a pitcher like Dempster and all KW got back was Dylan Axelrod, Jared Mitchell, and an A ball pitcher who throws hard, I think I might throw up.

QUOTE (MAX @ Jul 8, 2012 -> 11:45 PM) Since May 1st he has been hitting the ball well. Above average. I find that so encouraging that I think he deserves half credit. Its arguable though. He's been hitting well since May 1st, but he's also had an OPS of .639 in the last month, which is below average. I'm not saying he's a bad player (or a good player for that matter), but I just don't think he can get credit for turning it around when he's remained largely the same.

QUOTE (MAX @ Jul 8, 2012 -> 11:11 PM) Beckham had a good may and june. July is young. April sucked. He deserves at least half credit. I'm just saying that he's been the same player for the last few seasons: below average offensively, above average defensively. He's basically halfway between his worst full season and his best full season right now. I guess he can get credit for staying the same?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 8, 2012 -> 10:00 PM) Before the season started, my theory was that the team's fortunes rested, more than anything, on the performance of the four horsemen of underachievement: Dunn, Rios, Peavy and Beckham. If 4 of 4 or even 3 of 4 got back to form, this team would compete for the division. 2 of 4, .500 team or a little under. 1 of 4 or none, it would be ugly. Dunn? Check, full credit. Rios? Check, full credit. Peavy? Check, full credit. Beckham? Call it half credit. 3.5 of 4, and here they sit, atop the AL Central. Loving it. I think you're being a little generous to Beckham here. Hard not to love the team being in first place, though.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 5, 2012 -> 06:16 PM) So let me get this straight, the two trades that KW overpaid are: Swisher, where he traded for an All star player that didn't mesh with Gregs favorite manager. And Edwin, where by many accounts KW got f***ed over by Rizzo trying to acquire Dunn. This isn't a valid excuse. If KW didn't really want to risk being stuck with Jackson, he should have made it a three way deal.

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Jun 28, 2012 -> 11:46 PM) Where is the link between Parham and Parker? That's all I'm saying. He's a good recruiter and good guy from everything I've heard. Good hire for Illinois just don't think he's the key to landing Parker. In a direct quote from Robert Smith: Not that I believe Jabari will end up choosing Illinois. The ties to Nunn could be very important, though.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Jun 27, 2012 -> 11:47 PM) You would have said this regardless. I'll take Chi coaches over your biased opinion. Honestly, I think they are mostly just happy that Illinois is giving them attention. For most of these guys, I'll believe what they're saying when I see it.

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Jun 27, 2012 -> 11:38 PM) I doubt Parham is the key to anything. He was solid for ISU, but Muller didn't need him once he brought in Dana Ford and company. I think it's mostly about getting him to open some doors for the rest of the staff. Groce is a pretty good recruiter, so if Parham can get him in the conversation with some of the 2nd tier recruits, Groce would presumably be able to close the deal with some of them. I'm not a huge fan of the hire myself, but there wasn't another candidate who really stood out to make this hire look bad.

I was kind of expecting it to be an STD.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 10:44 PM) At some point I will go find you this evidence, Dick...tonight I do not have the time nor the energy. That being said, yes, we have a high revenue because we are in a major market. We also correspondingly spend a high dollar figure on payroll. This is obvious and has been pointed out numerous times. The fact remains that will more attendance dollars, more money can be put into payroll. The Rangers, who we both mentioned, have increased their payroll from $65 million in 2010 to $92 million in 2011, and $121 million in 2012. Meanwhile, ours decreased from $128 million in 2011 to $98 million in 2012. These figures are at least partially tied to attendance. You don't decrease your payroll 30 million from one year to the next for s***s and giggles. That is directly a response to attendance and decreasing revenues. And the decreased attendance was directly a response to last year's team probably being the least likable Sox team I've ever witnessed (albeit, a small sample size for me). Obviously, there are a lot of factors that contribute to continued low attendance this year, but a theory I've had for awhile is that the actual fan base is just not as big as people assume that it is. You always hear about how Sox fans need to go to more games so we can make a deal at the deadline etc. But, I think that it's more the fact that in recent history the Sox have not done a very good job of establishing excitement, which would draw people who aren't exactly Sox fans to the games. Also, does anybody know exactly how much the Sox make off of ticket sales and concessions? I think I remember reading that at least a portion of one or the other went to the state because of the stadium deal.

Reminds me a lot of the Bulls-Heat from last year. Oh well, just gonna have to avoid espn more so than usual over the next couple weeks.

I love the girl pointing and laughing at Riley.

Is anybody else starting to get annoyed by the woman who has been shrieking "woo" the entire game?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 05:54 PM) It very well could, however, it also ensures that these teams can sign the top players with their picks, vs. letting them drop in the draft due to signability concerns. For example, and I know the decision worked out okay, the Twins could have taken Prior over Mauer. Clearly the Twins lucked out but that isn't always the case. I've always felt that if you're going to put a stringent cap on either the draft or major league spending, you need to put a cap on both. It's not really fair if teams can gain a competitive advantage in major league spending, but smaller market teams can't even chance the small amount of money they have to spend on prospects.