lasttriptotulsa

Pierre

Rios

Dunn

Quentin

Dunn

Beckham

Didn't see this posted anywhere, but Baseball Tonight will be at Sox Spring Training today at 2:30 CT on ESPN. Just a heads up.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 02:17 PM) Um, people have died and been brought back. I guess thats how we can end this entire debate. Call up Nikki Sixx from Motley Crue and ask him if dieing hurts, and then we'll know.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 02:11 PM) I'm not buying a violent death sans suffering. However, I am just jumping in at the tail end of the thread here and was only commenting on that single post. Hunting seems much more ethical to me than eating animals raised in a factory farm, but I don't do either. You may be right, there may be a few seconds or so of suffering, but theres no way to know that unless it happens to you. The suffering experienced is still miniscule compared to having your head held under water, being hooked up to a car battery, etc....

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) f*** it, I'm taking it to the next level. Michael Vick is just like Hitler because they both owned dogs at some point and were responsible for the deaths of living things in some way. Ha Ha. Sounds logical to me.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 01:59 PM) Anyone who takes any moral stance runs the risk hypocrisy. If hypocrisy is the worst crime, then it would be better not to have any morals at all. Of course, whether it's hypocritical or not depends entirely on how the issue is framed. If it's a question of reducing the human-induced suffering of animals, then vegans are no hypocrites. The point I've been trying to get across, is that if an animal is harvested correctly, there is no "suffering". When an animal is shot through a vital organ, especially the heart/lungs they die instantly. They do not suffer. And that is the problem with what Michael Vick did, and what factory farms do everyday.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 01:48 PM) This post is ridiculous. No one attacked you yet you're attacking me. You seem to know nothing about a vegan lifestyle. Veganism is about going out of your way to avoid the consumption of animals and animal products. I'm not going to advocate that everyone kill themselves so that we can give the animals their land back. And no I don't wear leather shoes or leather anything for that matter. Same goes for wool or silk. If you view that as an attack, I am sorry. That was not necessarily aimed directly at you, but when I get compared to Michael Vick because I hunt, I take offense to that.

Vegans make me laugh. Do you people live in a house? How many animals were displaced when your house was built? And tell me again what is your house made of? Wood? Trees are habitat to many species of animals. I can't believe you people would take an animals home like that. How could you? Do you wear leather shoes or do you go barefoot all the time. Have you ever played a sport with a ball made of leather? Vegans act so superior, but there just as big of hypocrites as everyone else.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 01:19 PM) You honestly think there are enough places like that to sustain the 6 billion people on Earth? It's not remotely possible to feed people meat and dairy from farms like the one you described. I'd guess those specific animal products accounts for less than 1% of all animal products produced for consumption. You are 100% correct. Places like that are a very small minority, and that is why it's up to the consumer to be willing to buy from these places whenever possible. Sure you might pay a little more, but to me its worth that extra little cost. Factory farming is a huge problem and the way the world is today, its impossible to only buy from these types of folks. There are great organizations out there that are trying to end factory farming and bring farming back to the small town, family farmer. One of these is Farm-Aid.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 11:40 AM) This whole subject and thread is hilarious to me, for one simple reason. Mark Buehrle is an "outdoorsman" in that he hunts. He dresses up in camo and sits in a tree with a rifle waiting for deer to shoot. He kills defenseless animals for sport. How this is any different than Michael Vick killing a dog is beyond me. Buehrle should STFU and stick to what he's good at, throwing baseballs. You really don't see a difference between torturing dogs and getting entertained by their torture, and shooting an animal with a high power weapon that kills it almost instantly. I am an avid hunter, but I agree with Buehrle 100%, Vick deserved what he got and should have gotten a whole lot worse. And everyone talking about these factory farms, yes they are horrible the way they slaughter and treat animals, but the whole world is not like this. There are plenty of places to buy meat products from that the animal was killed humanely and never suffered. Take my buddies farm for instance. They have hundreds of acres of pasture where their steer can graze all day long until its time for them to be butchered. When this time comes they are taken to a locker plant, where there are shot directly through the skull, killing them instantly. They do not suffer in any way. There is nothing wrong with hunting as long as its done humanely, which is why there are many many laws in place to regulate it. When hunting larger game, there are even laws regulating the caliber of gun you use. You can not legally use a caliber of gun that is too small to humanely kill the animal. What Vick did and what Buehrle and millions of others do are not even remotely similar. Remember human beings are the ultimate apex predator, noone has a problem with a Killer Whale killing a defenseless Seal, or a Lion killing a poor little Gazelle. Its only the manner in which you do that it can become a problem. But I guess if you people view Buehrle as a hypocrite because of it, then I guess I'm a hypocrite too.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 12, 2011 -> 11:57 AM) Frank's 1.217 OPS that season is the 18th best OPS of all time. Take out Bonds' 4 seasons on that list and McGwire's 1, and it becomes the 13th best of all time. Of those 13 totals, they came from 5 players: Babe Ruth 7 times, Ted Williams 2 times, Rogers Hornsby 1 time, Lou Gehrig 1 time, and Jimmie Foxx 1 time. You don't fluke your way into a 1.217 OPS. (of course, Bagwell had a 1.201 OPS that season too, but that's a full two spots behind Thomas) As good as his season was that year, he had a slight slump right before the work stoppage. With another month and a half of the season left he probably would have recovered and had one of the top 5 seasons of all time. Check out his numbers at the all-star break that year. .383 BA .515OBP .795 SLG 1.311 OPS 32 HR 78 RBI. That is just a mind boggling first half, just imagine if he kept that pace all year long.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 01:43 PM) ...see Jake Peavy or Chris Sale...yikes. Yeah I certainly hope it isn't the case, but I could definately see that motion of Sale's giving him some trouble at some point in his career.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 11:38 AM) I think the Crawford deal is worse than the Werth deal by a long shot. Agreed. Crawford for the next 2-4 years might be worth close to his annual salary, still overpaid in my mind but not ridiculous, but the last few years of that contract they are gonna regret. Werth won't lose near as much of his game as Crawford will throughout the length of their contracts. Most guys, maybe Crawford's an exception, stop stealing bases in their early to mid thirties. I see him dropping to 20-25 bags tops in 4 or 5 years.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 10:19 AM) So as of right now we have pretty much the same exact offensive lineup from last year except Dunn replaces Kotsay...right? Other than third base, yea. I doubt were going to see Vizquel or Teahen starting there most the year. My money is on it being Morel's job to lose.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 09:59 AM) This is good and unexpected news (the money anyway). Maybe the third year was the sticking point. The money per year is quite reasonable. Now, can PK get to 500 HRs in the next three years? 135 HRs in 3 years? Not likely. Dunn however, might.

QUOTE (Mattchoo @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 07:50 AM) I'm not excited at all about signing PK to 3/40+, or DLee for 10M. Can't the Sox get in on the Prince Fielder talk? I'll settle for PK or DLee if it is a good deal. 2/24 for PK, or DLee for about 6-7M 1 yr. Do any of us expect trades this week for the Sox? I would love to get in on the Prince Fielder talks, he's looking at $11M in arbitration which ain't too bad, but I just don't think the Sox have the pieces that they are willing to part with. I imagine the Brewers are looking for pitching and we just don't have it to give. Seems like we think Sale is the real deal so we don't wanna lose him, and with the question marks about Peavy, we can't really trade a starter or we'll have a circus at the fifth spot that we've had some many years in the past.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 11:30 AM) I'm not impatient. I just find the entire notion ridiculous. The guy is a solid player at a position full of them coming off a huge year at the age of 34. He deserves a nice contract. 2/$20 maybe. But this 3/$45 crap is ridiculous. 2/$20M is what I would pay someone like him on the open market. Maybe go a little higher cause of his history with us. It can't help the situation when Jeter gets rewarded 3/$51M for the crap year he had last year just cause of his history. Maybe that's driving up PK's cost too.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 11:15 AM) If we're giving PK $15m, it'd better only be for 2 years. I'd say odds are pretty nill that they would give Konerko $15M even for one year. As much as we all love the guy he just ain't worth that, especially with how up and down his career has been.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 11:00 AM) Cowley saying PK is asking for $15M per year. If thats the case, see ya Paulie and thanks for the memories.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 10:54 AM) I understand that he might be more lenient when it comes to certain players but that would make no sense with the other moves we just made. I think he gives Kenny a budget and the organization operates within that budget, if 1B position isn't going to cost a certain amount then I believe "the extra" money [or at least SOME of it] will be distributed on acquiring other pieces, all in an effort to field the best team come opening day. I think he probably does make exceptions for certain players, i.e. Konerko, Buehrle. But I only believe that it would be like a couple million. If Konerko doesn't sign, its not like the $12 or $13 million that was to be used for him is going to drop down to say $5 or $6 million to sign a different 1B and relievers.