I'm not bitter, angry, or impatient...Just honest.

 

This team is old and unathletic. It has average power, no speed, no patience (as in OBP), and poor defense.

 

I will be forever in debt to these guys for 2005, but it's time to strip this rusty machine down and start again. Assuming you can get value for them, get rid of every player north of 30 you possibly can (with the possible exception of Konerko).

 

If all went right for this team, it would still be an 88 win team. That's not good enough in this division, where your chief contenders are both younger and more talented than you are.

 

It's time to build for the future.

It will happen soon enough. Danks is the only person who I will lose a second of sleep over if they're traded. The talent level in our organization is frighteningly low right now, despite Hawk and DJ saying how much talent we have.

I like our bullpen. Everything else, I don't really give a crap about.

It will happen soon enough. Danks is the only person who I will lose a second of sleep over if they're traded. The talent level in our organization is frighteningly low right now, despite Hawk and DJ saying how much talent we have.

 

Really? I would trade Danks. It's not like he's Liriano or Verlander. He has a Buehrlesque fastball. He's doing OK as a 22 year-old 5th starter in the AL, but I don't see any reason why he should be untouchable.

Buehrlesque

Really? I would trade Danks. It's not like he's Liriano or Verlander. He has a Buehrlesque fastball. He's doing OK as a 22 year-old 5th starter in the AL, but I don't see any reason why he should be untouchable.

 

Wow

Wow

 

I talked to you in the other thread about people who want to rebuild or people who want to reload. This I don't understand.

Really? I would trade Danks. It's not like he's Liriano or Verlander. He has a Buehrlesque fastball. He's doing OK as a 22 year-old 5th starter in the AL, but I don't see any reason why he should be untouchable.

If by "OK" you mean "outstanding" then yes, I agree.

 

 

NOTE: I've been using this writing style a lot lately and I must say I do like it quite a bit.

If by "OK" you mean "outstanding" then yes, I agree.

NOTE: I've been using this writing style a lot lately and I must say I do like it quite a bit.

If by "quite a bit" you mean "a helluva lot" then yes, it's evident.

Alright, I'm not saying that I'd trade Danks for scrap but I wouldn't make him untouchable. If an offer came with a young position player that had proven he could hit major league pitching I think the Sox should consider it. I'm not saying that Danks hasn't impressed me -- he has. But I don't see him becoming an ace, just becuase he doesn't have that kind of stuff. Not that it matters, but Sickels projection for him wasn't great -- he thought he was an injury risk ans that his numbers had never lived up to the hype. That's probably excessive, but the bottom line is that he doesn't look like the next Johan Santana.

 

Danks is valuable, and it should take a good deal to get him. But I wouldn't label him untouchable -- that's all I was saying.

If by "quite a bit" you mean "a helluva lot" then yes, it's evident.

I've only done it twice today so I'm not exactly going overboard. You best get used to it though because I'm going to be using it even more often in the coming days.

I've only done it twice today so I'm not exactly going overboard. You best get used to it though because I'm going to be using it even more often in the coming days.

Feel free to do so.

I've only done it twice today so I'm not exactly going overboard. You best get used to it though because I'm going to be using it even more often in the coming days.

 

Maybe I'm slow, but are you talking about the smaller text?

Maybe I'm slow, but are you talking about the smaller text?

No no. It's the classic, "If by '________' you mean '_________', then ______, I _______."

Maybe I'm slow, but are you talking about the smaller text?

No, I mean replacing the words and ideas of others with those of my own and then agreeing to the statement.

 

No no. It's the classic, "If by '________' you mean '_________', then ______, I _______."

Yeah, that.

No, I mean replacing the words and ideas of others with those of my own and then agreeing to the statement.

Yeah, that.

 

Oh.

 

I guess I am slow then, I didn't pick up on that.

At the end of the broadcast did it sound like Hawk was tired of making excuses for this team and is legitimately fed up like some of us have been for the past 2-3 weeks?

At the end of the broadcast did it sound like Hawk was tired of making excuses for this team and is legitimately fed up like some of us have been for the past 2-3 weeks?

 

Absolutely....he's a homer, but he's not a total idiot. It's way too early for this team to give up the way it has.

It's going to be a very long season....

i'm literally starting to dread watching sox games.

 

that's a first.

At the end of the broadcast did it sound like Hawk was tired of making excuses for this team and is legitimately fed up like some of us have been for the past 2-3 weeks?

 

I didn't see the end of the game. However, there seemed to be a few times tonight where both he and DJ said this was BS. Then they slip into "everything is cool" mode again.

I won't be able to watch the game tomorrow. Maybe that's a good thing. I can't wait to get that Ozzie bobblehead doll so I can take a hammer and demolish it with a smile on my face.

i'm literally starting to dread watching sox games.

 

that's a first.

 

Break anything ala young Willie yet?

Break anything ala young Willie yet?

there were no blue chairs around....and my mom isn't around to get mad at me