lasttriptotulsa

I graduated in 2002. We had the option of getting them but I cannot remember ever seeing a single member of my eighty person graduating class wearing one. I want to say the cost was around $75-$150 depending on which version you got but the cheap ones were pretty cheesy looking and maybe that's why nobody got them. My sister was three years older and it seemed like her entire class wore them.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 09:19 PM) Good lord. You're paying over double his value. This idea that this one hero is going to win us a world series is just silly. And does anyone even bother to look at his recent production? + on the hook contractually thru age 37. Tampa can keep its hero. Have you looked at his production lately? He's had one full season where he was under a 5.5 fWAR player and that was last year. It was by far his worst season and he was still a 3.4 fWAR player. Pablo Sandoval was also a 3.4 fWAR player last year that has dealt with injury and weight concerns his entire career and he signed a 5 year, $90 million contract. Longoria's contract is just $121.5 million guaranteed over the next 8 years. He is still well worth his contract and would get more on the open market.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Feb 10, 2015 -> 01:11 AM) Shall we all make guesses on the first name that Melton will butcher? He already kept referring to our new closer as "David Robinson" at SoxFest, but I'm wondering when the games start and he has theoretically asked people how to say these names, and he STILL messes half of them up, who will be the first victim. My all time favorite was he repeatedly called Fausto Carmona, Carmen Faustino or something like that.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 03:00 PM) Just a little reminder that WGN games will not air outside the Chicago market anymore. Although I'd rather watch BTVS than the Cubs....it really sucks we get screwed out of White Sox broadcasts QUOTE (woods of ypres @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 11:07 PM) That is f***ing horses***. Yep this is bulls***. MLB needs to change their blackout rules ASAP. All they are doing is asking for people to illegally stream their games. There is now no legal way for me to watch the WGN games.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 9, 2015 -> 11:58 AM) Anyone think that due to the unknown with Avi and his tendency to hit the ball on the ground, he should bat 7th and not 5th? Having a ground ball hitter batting behind LaRoche does not sound like a good idea. I'm thinking Alexei batting 5th could be a better idea. Alexei would bring some speed to the middle of the order which could alleviate ground ball DP's and move Avi to 7th and maybe take some pressure off of him. At this point, Alexei is a better run producer than Avi so why not? 1- Eaton 2- Melky 3- Abreu 4- LaRoche 5- Ramirez 6- Gillaspie 7- Avi 8- Flowers 9- Bonifacio/Beckham/Sanchez/Johnson In 879 opportunities to ground into a double play in his career, Alexei Ramirez has done so 113 times (12.9% of the time) In 106 opportunities to ground into a double play in his career, Avisail Garcia has done so 14 times (13.2% of the time) Obviously that is a fairly small sample size for Avisail Garcia, but there really isn't much difference between the two. With his power potential, I would rather see Avisail hit in the 5 spot and get the extra 30-40 plate appearances that are going to come with it versus the 7 spot. If Alexei is a better run producer this year that Avisail, I don't think we are going very far.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 5, 2015 -> 06:31 PM) Isn't that what knocked Rose out for 2013? Yes, but as a young basketball player he made the correct decision of having it repaired. Wade had the torn portion removed and has had problems ever since. As a 36 year old baseball player I would imagine Martinez will opt for the quickest route possible.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 5, 2015 -> 04:56 PM) I was looking forward to April 18 with Sale on the mound in Detroit...ya know, just to see what would happen. A torn meniscus is pretty minor. He should be back by then.

I used to collect cards religiously as a kid. I would estimate I have around 20-30,000+ cards stored in various places. Most of which are from the 90's so they aren't worth the paper their printed on for the most part. Around 2006-2007 I kind of got back into collecting and started buying the various Topps Chrome and Bowman Chrome varieties, especially the Bowman Chrome Draft Picks and Prospects set. Some of those rookie cards are worth a few bucks if you have the refractors/x-fractor/blue-refractor/gold-refractor variations. Now I buy a couple retail boxes a year. Usually when I'm at Wal-Mart or Target with my brother and we see them and decide to split a $20-$30 box just for s***s and giggles.

Signing Beckham and penciling him in as the starting 2B? No thank you. Signing Beckham as a platoon player and insurance policy in case of a Johnson/Sanchez falter? All for it. If he plays well enough to force himself additional at bats, then that's a good problem to have.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 08:54 AM) I wonder what guys like Cameron Bairstow would have to say other than "I want minutes" Hey, whatever he said must have worked because he got in the game and tore it up. He had 3 points and 2 rebounds in just 2 minutes. That works out to be 54 points and 36 rebounds per 36 minutes and he also had a TS% of .614.

I like it. Make as many of these low risk, potential high reward type signings as possible and at least one of them should pan out.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 21, 2015 -> 11:59 AM) That's not how compensation works anymore. The Sox will offer him a one year contract for somewhere around 15-17 mil, depending on what the number is next offseason, and if he rejects and signs somewhere else we get their first round pick if is unprotected. That's not how it works either. If the Sox make him a qualifying offer and he declines, the Sox don't get the pick from the team who signed him. They get a sandwich pick between the first and second round. The first round pick from the team who signed him just vanishes (2nd round if they are in the first 10 picks).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 12:28 PM) I love Mark, but is one of the last guys I see as a coach. It just doesn't seem like his personality. I remember him saying at one point after a bad start to a season that he didn't even workout in the off-season. I agree. There is really zero chance Buehrle has a job in baseball after retirement. Not that he couldn't get one if he wanted, but the day he retires he's going home to be with the wife and kids and spend a lot of time in that tree stand.

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 16, 2015 -> 09:30 AM) not saying that his bat is "The" reason why he's in...as everyone has said previously...a choice of who goes in is ultimately a composite decision...mostly of where you stand versus your peers/generation (offensively, defensively, pitching, etc) , longevity, your accomplishments (whether awards, championships, etc), where you stand in history (most incomparable due to changes in game over time). When i cite his OPS, its not me saying "see! this is why he should be in!", but rather a simple complement to him for being on that list. I personally like OPS as a singular general overview of offensive prowess, but am aware that there may be other statistics that might be more relevant, but aren't as simple for the layman to understand. OPS is not really a good stat to compare players from different generations as it's not adjust for park and league factors. If you really want to compare them you need to use OPS+ or better yet wRC+.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 02:31 PM) Yes, "absolutely phenomenal" is correct. Adams and Danish are both probably top 5 prospects in a rapidly improving system. As someone who doesn't follow the minors that close, other than looking at stats, is Danish still using that 3/4, slide step quick delivery that he was in high school or have the Sox changed it?

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 10:34 PM) Is "absolutely phenomenal" really the correct verbage? Adams was nothing special last year, and while Danish has been good, he's still at WS. Let's hold off on absolutely phenomenal for now. If 12.7 K/9, .9 BB/9 and 14.75 K/BB at age 18 is nothing special, I can't wait to see what he is going to do when he figures it out.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 12:54 PM) This is it exactly. Buehrle is never going to get into the Hall of Fame because he never was thought of as the best. Even at his best, he was at least one tier below the best pitchers in the game. For my two cents, my top HOF criteria is how dominant they were in their era of the game. Mark Buehrle was never dominant. Really good? Sure. I agree with the part about Buehrle never being the best and maybe just a step below, but the Hall of Fame is full of guys who were never the best. Plenty have made it just by being very good for a long time. Take Biggio for instance. Did anybody ever really think they were watching a Hall of Famer when watching him? I know I didn't. The thing that got him in was hitting that magical number of 3000 hits. If he ends up with 2800 hits, I don't think he gets in. I think Buehrle is a similar case. To get in, he really needs the 300 wins and that is a long shot. He would need 7+ years of his average total to get there. If he ends up with 240 or so wins he'll be a guy who stays on the ballot awhile and maybe comes close to election but will probably fall just short. I see him getting the Jack Morris, Tommy John, Jim Kaat type treatment. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with being Jack Morris, Tommy John, or Jim Kaat. They all had hell of careers. Buehrle will be remembered he just probably won't get a plaque unless he can keep going strong and decides to pitch until he's 42 or 43.

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 11:29 AM) There are certain magic numbers that A & B hit that are HOF benchmarks, but you have to look at their individual seasons to really get how good they were. Player A (Tom Glavine) - 300 wins.....thats huge in the HOF eyes. but also, his career from 1991-1997 were pretty darn good...he just happened to stick around long enough in the aging curve to really suppress his WHIP #s. But I like to think of Frank Thomas...really damned good/elite in the 90s, but 2001-2007 was good, but not elite. He got in because of those 90s numbers. Comparatively Buehrle throughout his career has been consistently good, but only one season (2005) where he might have been considered near the top of MLB. Player (B) Smoltz - 3000 strikeouts...again his numbers as a starter in the 90s were really really good/elite. Then as a closer he also was really good. So ultimately, Glavine & Smoltz had very good peaks, and then tapered off, where Buerhle was 'good'...not elite, but good. Tom Glavine 1991-1997, 30 fWAR, 4.28 fWAR per season Mark Buehrle 2002-2008, 28.8 fWAR, 4.11 fWAR per season

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 09:42 AM) Well, I don't buy the argument that just because one mistake was made, we need to keep making more. Like, for example, Jim Rice does NOT belong in the HOF, but he's there. Does that mean we have to induct every guy better than Jim Rice now? I say no. That said (I'm assuming Player C is a projected Buerhle line if he did 5 more years at his current level), if a guy eclipses 60 fWAR, he should usually at least be considered. So you wouldn't put Tom Glavine or John Smoltz in the Hall of Fame? Yes Player C is Buehrle if he pitches 5 more seasons at the same level as his last 5. By the way Buehrle is at 51.8 fWAR today. So by your 60 fWAR rule he is only 3 of his average seasons or 2 of his good seasons away from at least being in consideration.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 15, 2015 -> 08:53 AM) The bolded lines are not consistent, IMO. It takes more than an above average player to make the HOF cut. Buehrle is awesome; not even close to a hall-of-famer. Not yet, but if the scenario that I laid out earlier plays out I really need you to explain to me why two of these guys are first ballot Hall of Famers and why one of them is not even close. Player A - 305-203, 3.54 ERA, 118 ERA+, 4413.1 IP, 2607 K, 1.314 WHIP, 3.1 BB/9, 5.3 K/9, 1.74 K/BB, 64.3 fWAR Player B - 213-155, 3.33 ERA, 125 ERA+, 3473 IP, 3084 K, 1.176 WHIP, 2.6 BB/9, 8.0 K/9, 3.05 K/BB, 78.7 fWAR Player C - 263-207, 3.81 ERA, 117 ERA+, 4108 IP, 2323 K, 1.283 WHIP, 2.0 BB/9, 5.2 K/9, 2.54 K/BB, 67.0 fWAR

All joking aside, I can't even tell you guys how thrilled I would be if he could somehow pull it all together and become the fourth outfielder on this time. I've always been a fan of his and really felt that had Ozzie not jerked him around so much that he could have become at least an average major league centerfielder.

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 10:01 AM) and his strikeouts still vastly outnumbered his walks. Who cares? You can say the same about nearly every player. Dunn had the second highest BB/K ratio on the team last year. Only Eaton was better. Mike Trout BB/K - .451 Adam Dunn BB/K - .492

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 12:45 PM) so lets say i give you that 5 year 'extension' as you discussed. i think Buehrle comps similarly to Andy Pettitte in terms of overall numbers. What do you feel about Pettitte for HOF worthiness? Just doing a search of most IP between 1996-2014, i came up with Roy Halladay, CC Sabathia, Mike Mussina, Curt Shilling, Clemens (yeah i know...roids) as guys who can make their HOF argument before Buehrle... I see Buerhle more of a 'very good' on the same level as Tim Hudson, Jaime Moyer, Bartolo Colon, Pettitte This doesn't even really account the younger generation who overlaps with the latter half of Buerhle's career that could block him out...Verlander, King Felix...etc. There are just too many people i would take over him Andy Pettitte is an admitted PED user so he may not be the best comparison as he will probably never get in, but if the PED use had never surface I think Pettitte would have been inducted. The Hall of Fame is a reflection of a player's entire career, not just a single season or just their peaks. You can get in by having a insanely high peak, an insanely high overall value or a combination of the two. Buehrle is a perfect combination of peak and total career worth.

QUOTE (Armchair Hahn @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 12:28 PM) when it comes to HOF discussions, its usually about how a player is relative to his generation. Thats what it comes down to....do you think Mark Buerhle was one of the best pitchers of his generation? I resoundingly say "no"! It's a combination of both relative to your generation and where you stand all time. At their best Tim Lincecum and Barry Zito were better than Mark Buehrle. Let's see who ends up with more HOF votes when all is said and done. I would say that Buehrle was absolutely one of the best of his generation all things considered. During the 2000s, Buehrle was 8th in fWAR and 4th in wins in all of baseball. And by the way, we are on a Sox message board and Buehrle pitched 12 seasons for the Sox. Can we at least show him enough respect to spell his name right?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 14, 2015 -> 12:20 PM) I HATE ERA being discussed for the HOF. It totally misses era context. A 3.81 era while Buehrle pitched is pretty damned good. While Ted Lyons pitched it would have had you run out of baseball. Exactly. I think it's fairly safe to say that if Buehrle came up in today's pitching environment instead of during the steroid era that his career ERA would be at least a half run lower.