Reddy

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jan 20, 2014 -> 02:33 AM) FWIW, ...told "anyone that calls the Sox longshots in this Tanaka thing are just wrong".

Crabtree tweets: Film don't lie... @nflnetwork @espn pull up the tape of that game and show me where this guy is the best? #fake #fake #fake Sherman responds: A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinions of a sheep. Greatest. Tweet. Ever.

QUOTE (Frank_Thomas35 @ Jan 19, 2014 -> 11:19 AM) I wonder if the fact that the Sox are offering him the largest contract is White Sox history helps him see how much the FO values him. I mean that has to mean something. I think the fact the Sox are so quiet on this says something also, what I don't know but it just seems weird to me we're not hearing any $ figures out of them. frankly I think it's smart. If Tanaka doesn't want teams publicly leaking info, and the only team NOT LEAKING INFO is the Sox? Smart Hahn, very smart.

offshoot from the "Adam Eaton = a worse Pods" convo? (ridiculous btdubs)

I'd also like you all to go check the projections for 2005. not saying we're that good, but projections don't mean much when you're dealing with so many unknowns

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 13, 2014 -> 01:17 PM) There is nothing that can change onfield outcomes in the way that well-used steroids can. Greenies can increase your focus and energize you in a long season. Andro could give results that would be indistinguishable from what the average person would get by slightly improving their diet or exercise routine. Steroids could turn your shallow flies into homers and do so with little expertise in diet, exercise, or even steroid use -- just use enough of the right stuff, half-ass your post-cycle therapy, and lift some weights. You'll get a lot better. Even better, it will slash your injury recovery time and perhaps an in-season cycle will keep you from that yearly in-season weight loss/nagging injuries. It won't make Reddy or me into an MLB ballplayer, but it can certainly make a marginal MLB player into a highly coveted, one of the best in the league types of player. It can help an aging player be better than he was in his prime. They can make a minor leaguer into a usable MLB player. speak for yourself. I was damn good back when I played. I could've been the next David Eckstein!

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 13, 2014 -> 12:25 PM) They are worse. It is the variable which significantly makes you a better and different player. The other variables may help you play up to your potential (greenies) but steroids change your potential in an unnatural way. The other aspect is health. If you concerned about head injuries in football that is nothing compared to what these will to your body. and amphetamines don't? Kick out Hank Aaron!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 13, 2014 -> 12:06 PM) And this is where I say too f***ing bad to MLB. The players wanted an environment that was free from testing, so that a significant portion of them could cheat. The owners and Selig were either too weak, or too scared to actually do something about this, and actually cut out the questions involved in who is clean and who is not. MLB as a whole created this problem with their actions. They can deal with it. They are reaping what they have sown. All I'm saying is that it's horribly inconsistent. Why wasn't Gaylord Perry banned from baseball for life?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 13, 2014 -> 11:58 AM) The voters have obviously proven that you CAN refuse to vote for someone based on doubt and suspicion. Why couldn't you? Due to the circumstances, every single player was guilty by association unless you did something to stand out and prove you were clean. Thomas did that. It seems that there's enough support and evidence surrounding Thome and Griffey that they should get in too, but it's certainly possible they don't too. We'll find out in a few years. So why not Bagwell then?

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 13, 2014 -> 09:47 AM) I'm not saying it's unreasonable to believe he's clean -- we see lots of sportswriters voting for him. You just have to recognize that there are reasons for others to not vote for him, which many sportswriters aren't doing...probably due to the widespread suspicion/knowledge among players and writers about his steroid use. There are also probably a few folks that he rubbed the wrong way with his "there is a 'Hispanic conspiracy' against me just because I said all Hispanic players should learn English if they are going to play ball in AMERICA" Honestly I doubt he was 100% clean, but the problem is you can't make HoF votes based on doubt and suspicion, because that's a slippery and clearly unfair slope. The hall is FULL of cheaters - why are steroids any better or worse? They aren't. It's simply our mass media and access making it such a big deal. Do I wish players had never used? Yep. Do I hate Barry Bonds? Yep. But there's literally no fair way to say who should and shouldn't be in the hall, so in light of that, I don't see another option besides voting the players with the best stats into the hall.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 12, 2014 -> 07:40 PM) And a New York sportswriter as well as numerous other sportswriters who can't talk about it on the record since he told them outright? How much do we expect to get here? Actual sources.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 12, 2014 -> 07:30 PM) I'm not concerned with Andro nor am I especially concerned about greenies I'm concerned with this: That's a published excerpt from Jeff Pearlman's book about (mainly) Roger Clemens's career So an unnamed veteran and Reggie Jefferson are our sources? That's the best we've got?

I've always wanted to do Jackson, but then it became a popular kid's name so I've soured on it a bit.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 12, 2014 -> 10:52 AM) There has been a lot of discussion from former players about suspected use from Piazza. A grown man who suddenly gets outbreaks of back acne is a telltale sign You realize how ridiculous that is right? I'm 27 and I still get acne on occasion. Why have none of those reports come from teammates? Why has no one gone on the record? Anecdotes are anecdotes - likely coming from someone who just didn't like Piazza very much. My point in all this is what's the difference between Piazza and Biggio? Piazza and Bagwell? An anecdote from an off-the-record somebody about back acne? Really? You realize a LOT of things can cause you to break out. Maybe he drank like crazy one night and ate a whole pizza! Listen, frankly I don't even care if he used or didn't because I've moved past caring. If everyone used then the playing field was level right? It's just inconsistent to say "no one from the era should be in the hall" but then want Frank in. However it's also inconsistent to say "i wont vote in anyone who was suspected of PEDs" and then vote in Bagwell/Biggio... or frankly ANYONE not named Frank Thomas. He's literally the only person in baseball who has remained consistent in his stance against PEDs. I don't even know how you can vote in Maddux and Glavine. Why are they immune to suspicion? At the end of the day, Piazza played in NYC. If he'd stayed in LA his whole career or gone to a media market not named NYC he'd be a hall of famer right now. But there's always someone looking to "get ya" in NYC when it comes to pro sports figures. As for Andro - first off it was legal at the time and secondly I will refer back to my position about Hank Aaron, Willy Mays and Gaylord Perry. All "cheaters" who are still in the hall. Explain?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2014 -> 08:24 PM) "Never failed a drug test" is literally a useless statement in this league. That's just how it is. Anyone could well have failed the 03 tests and we wouldn't know. nonetheless, with the information we all have, how can you justify not voting in the best hitting catcher of all time?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2014 -> 08:19 PM) No...but neither was Sosa. Give me one piece of evidence from a player - or anyone else - on the record about Piazza's steroid use. Might take a while since it doesn't exist. He doesn't look like a user, and he's never been outed and never failed a drug test. the "suspicion" excuse is asinine.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2014 -> 08:14 PM) Here's the problem with that concept. ptatc said he could have some suspicions based on how hard it is to build up the muscles in the forearms like that, but that's supposedly why Palmeiro's drug of choice was Winstrol; it doesn't Bonds-you. AND HE WAS OUTED IN THE MITCHELL REPORT! Was Piazza!?

Further consideration:

Mike Piazza then and "now" Yeah totally reminiscent of Barry Bonds. Absolutely. smh gmafb

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 11, 2014 -> 09:22 AM) I don't have hard evidence, but the sparse evidence/anecdotes I have along with my gut feeling based on physique and all that make me want to withhold my "vote." I'm more amenable to voting for Bagwell than Piazza, but I'm not yet comfortable making that vote. The fact that many other writers aren't, despite his quite wonderful career, makes me think I'm not alone in that suspicion. So what about Frank's "physique"? He went from 240 in 1990 to 275 a couple years later.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 08:43 PM) I like the 10-person limit and I don't mind that many people vote for fewer than that. You should vote for everyone you believe ought to be a Hall of Famer. If your standards are so loose that it means you want to vote for more than 10 people, too bad -- this is an exclusive club. The way I would vote would also involve voting differently on a player's first ballot than second, if appropriate. My vote would have been: Frank Thomas (1st ballot) Greg Maddux (1st ballot) Curt Schilling Edgar Martinez with plans to vote for Mussina and Glavine on their second ballots. Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, Palmeiro excluded for steroid suspicion You seem like a level headed guy - explain the Piazza/Bagwell thing. What hard evidence do you have they used and Schilling didn't?

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 07:01 PM) If the season started tomorrow, who are your 4th and 5th starters? Johnson and.... Rienzo probably. But Paulino is in the mix as well.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 06:57 PM) Even if that major league ready talent doesn't turn out to be very good at major league baseball? even in that case, like i said, I'd still prefer the GM who makes those moves over the one that signs Matt Garza. every day of the week.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 06:52 PM) I may be in the minority, but I do believe he can be effective with us. If the Sox simply only want to run 20 year olds to the mound, then I can understand not paying Garza the big bucks. But to say he will suck for us because of the way he finished the season in Texas is irrational. I want Tanaka more than the next guy, but is it realistic? And since it is not likely realistic do you guys simply want give our prospects a chance to develop in spots 4 and 5? I can respect that but them Hahn BETTER go after Scherzer next winter for sure. Why? Our pitching isn't a problem and doesn't figure to be.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 06:42 PM) I know he is older, but he will also be $50 million cheaper, I think Garza and Coop can really work well together where he is more of a ground ball pitcher. He is only 30 and has won some big playoff games. 2009 ALCS MVP. We need a veteran right handed SP who can split up the lefties. Garza can eat innings and is a gamer. Also lastly, he will not cost us draft picks. Now IMO that is just as big enough reason to go after him if you ask me. All the other veteran starters FA's will cost picks. you dont just go from being a fly ball pitcher to a ground ball pitcher on the wrong side of 30 no matter how good Coop is. Tanaka won't cost draft picks either. Getting no one won't cost us draft picks either. Honestly I just dont think there's enough guarantee he outperforms even Erik Johnson enough to warrant what is certain to be a huge contract. He'd be Vazquez or Jackson v. 2.0