hi8is Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Titled South Siders' future now? 12:37 PM ET Chicago White Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 So basically it's entirely Law ripping us again? How many articles does that guy need? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted January 27, 2010 Author Share Posted January 27, 2010 Here's another good lead in I'd like to read... Law: 2010 organizational rankings Keith Law | Scouts Inc. (14 hours ago) Keith Law ranks the farm systems of all 30 teams, from the Rangers at No. 1 to the White Sox at No. 30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 (edited) oh,i didnt know fields was considered "young talent". ranked dead last, really? congrats to teams, such as the nationals, who suck so much as a result, their future looks bright. Edited January 27, 2010 by Melissa1334 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I'm not a moderator here, obviously, but I just want to let you know to be careful about re-posting text from another website, especially if it's content you have to pay for. There's a reason they make you pay for it, and it isn't so it can be re-posted somehwere else for free. I see that happen a lot here, and I'm just thinking about the moderators and owner(s) of this site. You probably don't want to create any more headaches for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 As for Mr. Law: It's a mistake to lump the wealth of bench players into the mix when you call them "one of the older teams in baseball." They're bench players and all under one year contracts. Who cares if the bench is older if the majority of your starters are in their mid to late 20s? The core of this team is actually pretty young. I rarely take much of what Keith Law says to heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 I think technically we are not supposed to copy/paste more than a 3 or 4 line abstract from any site and we're not supposed to paste entire articles of anything, even free content, but that subject's never really come up around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Law said were the definitive division favorites on TV today fwiw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 The legend of the internet attorney tracking down mischievous users posting content is just that, a legend. It has never happened in the past years on this website, and never will. It's no different than someone copying pages from a book, or pasting a copyrighted image. Let's just say it would be known FAR before it reached Soxtalk that ESPN is tracking down those who post their content. You'd see several stories coming up from more well known blogs, message boards where content is posted. Well, I noticed you caved. That's fine. You can still basically summarize everything he says without putting it word for word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 06:06 PM) Law said were the definitive division favorites on TV today fwiw. We definitely have the most potential in the division. If Quentin, Rios, and Teahen hit like they can, we probably run away with this division. Ranking us 30th in terms of farm systems is pretty harsh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleCoastBias Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (gatnom @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 08:31 PM) We definitely have the most potential in the division. If Quentin, Rios, and Teahen hit like they can, we probably run away with this division. I think that's the problem that I and many others see: we have the most 'potential' while other teams (like the Twins) already have proven production. If everyone clicks, we can have a very potent offense to complement our potentially dominating staff. What is disconcerting is that we are waiting to see if this 'potential' comes to the surface, and that is why I am anxious about this offense. Optimistic, but anxious. I would rather have an offseason where we can go into April confident that we don't have an weaknesses, and right now I can't say I have that confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 We have a top-5 rotation in all of baseball, maybe the best. And all the guys minus Freddy are relatively young. Not worried at all what Keith Law says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (The Baconator @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 07:02 PM) I think that's the problem that I and many others see: we have the most 'potential' while other teams (like the Twins) already have proven production. If everyone clicks, we can have a very potent offense to complement our potentially dominating staff. What is disconcerting is that we are waiting to see if this 'potential' comes to the surface, and that is why I am anxious about this offense. Optimistic, but anxious. I would rather have an offseason where we can go into April confident that we don't have an weaknesses, and right now I can't say I have that confidence. I think going into any season with our kind of payroll means we are going to have some sort of weakness regardless of our intentions. This has been a pretty bad off season for Kenny (and Ozzie too, apparently), but I think our starting rotation and bullpen are good enough to keep us in the race for the entire season. Hopefully, our potential offensive holes don't materialize or aren't important enough to "break" the team as Ranger says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 He said Viciedo is not a prospect whilst ranking the Cubs 7th because of one 19 year old. Hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 07:32 PM) He said Viciedo is not a prospect whilst ranking the Cubs 7th because of one 19 year old. Hilarious. I don't understand how Viciedo is a non-prospect either. He was a 19 or 20 year old kid in AA getting his first taste of American baseball playing in a pitcher's paradise in a good pitcher's league. And I seem to recall that he improved in the second half of the season too, though I can't get his second half numbers up right now. Viciedo is a real prospect, though this is a big year for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 06:18 PM) The legend of the internet attorney tracking down mischievous users posting content is just that, a legend. It has never happened in the past years on this website, and never will. It's no different than someone copying pages from a book, or pasting a copyrighted image. Let's just say it would be known FAR before it reached Soxtalk that ESPN is tracking down those who post their content. You'd see several stories coming up from more well known blogs, message boards where content is posted. Well, I noticed you caved. That's fine. You can still basically summarize everything he says without putting it word for word. Your evidence is that because you've never heard of it then it never happens? No, it is different because websites make money based on web traffic and, for pay-sites, based on subscriptions. What makes you think they wouldn't be interested to know that a number of people are less like to pay for "insider" because those people can just go to Soxtalk and get the postings for free? It's entirely different than copying short excerpts from a book. It's espcially different now because of the ease of accessing the web nowadays. I know of a few websites that have been contacted by other sites demanding copyrighted text be removed and links inserted in their place if they wished to use the content. It does happen. Just because it hasn't happened here to your knowledge doesn't mean it doesn't happen anywhere. WSI, for example, routinely removes copyrighted text because of it. Trust me, if ESPN web staff knew it was happening, the administrators here would get notified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Viciedo a non-prospect? Cubs 7th? Whatever Kenny did to Keith Law, I really want to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 08:35 PM) Whatever Kenny did to Keith Law, I really want to know. You really don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 08:31 PM) Your evidence is that because you've never heard of it then it never happens? No, it is different because websites make money based on web traffic and, for pay-sites, based on subscriptions. What makes you think they wouldn't be interested to know that a number of people are less like to pay for "insider" because those people can just go to Soxtalk and get the postings for free? It's entirely different than copying short excerpts from a book. It's espcially different now because of the ease of accessing the web nowadays. I know of a few websites that have been contacted by other sites demanding copyrighted text be removed and links inserted in their place if they wished to use the content. It does happen. Just because it hasn't happened here to your knowledge doesn't mean it doesn't happen anywhere. WSI, for example, routinely removes copyrighted text because of it. Trust me, if ESPN web staff knew it was happening, the administrators here would get notified. Lol this board has been crazy this offseason, we need the season to start already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottyDo Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 10:50 PM) Lol this board has been crazy this offseason, we need the season to start already! aaaamen, sister! We've got some ridiculous off-season blues going on around here, and the only cure is April...and more cowbell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 08:31 PM) WSI, for example, routinely removes copyrighted text because of it. There's a reason why they are WSI and we are soxtalk. And I don't just mean the copyright bulls***. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox72 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 10:33 PM) There's a reason why they are WSI and we are soxtalk. And I don't just mean the copyright bulls***. ??? Because they don't want to risk losing their site due to copyright laws??? I'm confused. He was giving good and valid advice that should probably be followed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (Sox72 @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 10:45 PM) ??? Because they don't want to risk losing their site due to copyright laws??? I'm confused. He was giving good and valid advice that should probably be followed. I see you didn't read the second sentence. Though I meant to say "and I don't mean the copyright bulls***" so that's my fault for the mishap. And I know what Rooney is saying, though it's happened sooo much over the years here and we are still here. If anything, we should have been removed since 2006 on alot of crap we've done/pulled (not just this subject). But I'll stay out of this one. Just don't want the internet police on my case. (or anyone changing what has made ST what it is) QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 06:18 PM) The legend of the internet attorney tracking down mischievous users posting content is just that, a legend. It has never happened in the past years on this website, and never will. It's no different than someone copying pages from a book, or pasting a copyrighted image. Let's just say it would be known FAR before it reached Soxtalk that ESPN is tracking down those who post their content. You'd see several stories coming up from more well known blogs, message boards where content is posted. Well, I noticed you caved. That's fine. You can still basically summarize everything he says without putting it word for word. Great post. Edited January 28, 2010 by SoxAce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Hollywood Inn Express (went to law school). When posting info verbatim from another website, always link to the source. It is indeed not a good idea to post verbatim information that is "premium" content. You can link it, so the users who pay for the content can read it if you'd like. If you'd like to discuss some of the premium content, please, just put it into a synopsis of your own words for the other posters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox72 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 11:08 PM) I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Hollywood Inn Express (went to law school). When posting info verbatim from another website, always link to the source. It is indeed not a good idea to post verbatim information that is "premium" content. You can link it, so the users who pay for the content can read it if you'd like. If you'd like to discuss some of the premium content, please, just put it into a synopsis of your own words for the other posters. i'm in law school. can you give me a job. please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.