Balta1701

How many pitchers are you assuming we'll carry?

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 17, 2005 -> 08:06 AM) This really hurts when you look at what the Yankees gave up for Villone. That's just awful. Why Willie or Timo weren't offered is beyond me. I'm not saying the Marlins would do a deal straight-up for either of those two, but, the f***ing Yankees gave up a non-prospect and were able to land a very nice lefty in Villone. Was Kenny asleep at the wheel on this one? Let's just say this...if we enter the regular season with only 1 lefty in our bullpen and both Harris and Perez non-tendered, then we can deservedly ask why KW was asleep at the wheel. Until then, I don't think that's a really fair question - the odds are he's at least looking at some more youth in the bullpen, based on previous public statements.

QUOTE(Mercy! @ Dec 17, 2005 -> 05:43 AM) I think voting in national elections should be compulsory in the United States. Minimum $25 fine for failing to do so. It’d be interesting to know how many of the opinionistas on this board cast ballots in every local, state and federal election. That only works if you make election day a holiday. There are enough people in this country who genuinely can't vote because their employers say that they must work, or they simply cannot afford to take the time off of work (even with a $25 fine), that this fine would be too harsh otherwise.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 17, 2005 -> 08:02 AM) You're right, I didn't add anything by saying that... other then the fact that I can't stand Ted Rall. He's a political hack asshole, and nothing more. On that, I think we're in complete agreement. I can't stand Rall either.

The Yankees will hope that they're getting the Villone of the first half, and not the 2nd half of last year.

For added Irony you'd think they could have used coal to construct his tombstone.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 02:18 PM) thirdly, rex does not kickass. Ouch....

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 01:14 PM) You guys are cheating. You are supposed to give a memory of the player someone else mentions before you list a new player!!! Anyone can dig up old player names, the fun is actually remembering something about them. Sorry bout that...7500+ posts and I still don't have all the rules down here. Dale Sveum - I could never figure out how the hell that name was pronouced like it was. Terry Leach - probably one of the first sidearmers I ever watched pitch. Mike Huff - I always thought his name sounded funny. I never liked it when he played either.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 11:14 AM) Of course you agree as should everyone. The next person to make a Carl Everett trade joke should be banned. What if we genuinely believe that Carl Everett will be back in a Sox Uniform before he retires?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 01:23 PM) The government should be made to do with less before it asks the people to pay more. Why should you, me and everyone else subsidize wasteful government spending? Because, to put it simply, right now there is no possible motivation for the government to actually do more with less. Politicians are being elected based on how much money they can bring home to their district or to businesses within their district. Politicians are not being elected based on their willingness to balance the federal budget. We are subsidizing wasteful government spending because we have decided/been told that massive deficit spending is the best thing for our economy right now.

Dale Sveum Terry Leach Mike Huff Jose DeLeon

Just another victory for the Jesus-haters in the war on Christmas

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 12:15 PM) So you are saying the tax cuts did not increase revenues?????? We should not be allowed to keep more of our money. No let the government keep it and spend it on farm subsidies and entitlement programs. They work so well. I could make a number of notes here about which party was in power when the last, massive, gargantuan, ridiculous package of farm subisides was passed, but I believe I'll pass. Oh wait, I think I just did it.

QUOTE(S720 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 12:35 PM) Furthermore, the news of our President authorized the NSA to spy on citizens within the US WITHOUT a warrant is very intriguing! Let's see how is this thing going to pan out? Without a warrant and seemingly in direct contravention of the laws of the United States, which cannot be overturned by executive order.

So, out of Arizona, Seattle, and Philly, I already know that Philly has an offday on the day of the ring ceremony in Chicago...anyone know about the other 2 teams?

The NFL would certainly not make more money if it went pay per view. Right now, and in fact since Fox stole the NFC, basically every network running the NFL is actually losing money on the NFL in terms of total amount of money they take in from commercials during the games. A lot of money. But the networks keep doing this on the grounds that it brings the network Prestige (i.e. what Fox was looking for when it grabbed the NFC) and more viewers for its other shows. If the NFL went pay per view, I would buy the Super Bowl if that went there too, and that'd be it. Furthermore, in the new Monday Night Football contracts that are coming up, the NFL has taken steps to fix the problem you cite - they're allowing the networks to reschedule a handfull of games and move them between Sunday afternoon and Monday Primetime after the season has started, so that the prime time games can follow interesting storylines or winning teams.

QUOTE(sec159row2 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 10:59 AM) this story is in a few places... And are all of those places as fair and balanced as Newsmax.com, Fox News, and the column of Robert Novak?

Along with Several Republican Senators, the Democrats in the Senate were able to unite together strongly enough to completlely stop the proposed renewal of the Patriot Act's expiring provisions with a filibuster. The Cloture vote went 52-47, although Bill Frist voted against Cloture as a procedural move (it allows him to call the bill up for a vote again), so you should read it as the Republicans needing 7 more votes. It is also worth noting that there is a bipartisan Senate Agreement on renewing The Patriot Act which has already passed the Senate (unanimously I might add). However, the House was able to authorize the full version of the Act thanks to the larger Republican Majority there, so the bipartisan compromise bill is just sitting around hoping the Republicans will consider it. President Bush and the Republicans could have the Patriot Act renewed today, if they were even willing to consider bipartisanship or compromise at all.

They may be also thinking about moving some of these guys at midseason to a contender. If anyone was desperate for a catcher or a 2nd baseman, they might be able to talk to the Royals & have K.C. get something useful out of it.

QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 08:41 AM) I think Israel can do something about it, IF the Bush Administration lets the Israelis take their "kid gloves off"! What exactly can the Israeli's do? Launch airstrikes against Iranian nuclear targets? Unlike Iraq, Iran's nuclear program is widely spread out and often in fortified locations, obviously to protect against exactly the sort of attack that the Israelis launched on Iraq in the 80's. It would take several days of bombing to pull off any real damage. Furthermore, the Israeli jets cannot reach Iran and return on normal fuel tanks - the Iraqi government would have to give the Israelis permission to refuel inflight over Iraqi territory, something that will only happen if the U.S. forces the Iraqis to allow it (which would obviously serve as an anti-American rallying point in Iraq.) Furthermore, despite previous successes of the Mossad, it's still an open question whether or not people actually know the full extent of any Iranian nuclear program...they could very well have sites that no one currently knows about. And finally...Iran's military is not pathetic and weak, like Iraq's was before we invaded. They have the capability to launch strikes on Israel in response, possibly including Chemical attacks. Iran doesn't have to get its hands on a bomb to kill millions of Israelis.

QUOTE(Steve Bartman's my idol @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 08:29 AM) Negotiations to deny this certifiable lunatic genocidal weapons have been going nowhere. Everyone knows they will go nowhere. And no one will do anything about it. I don't know if the problem is as much no one being willing to do anything about it as it is no one being able to do anything about it even if they were willing.

Ok, in seeing the number drop from $8 million reported to $3 million reported, I'm much less enthusiastic about this trade.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:12 PM) I don't know about that. Young has said as soon as his 6 years are up, he's gone. And with Garland, as soon as his 1 year is up, he's gone.

So, I've seen a couple of White Sox people mention this as a possibility this offseason, and I thought it would make an interesting poll/discussion topic. Right now, the White Sox have 6 starting pitchers. Mark, Freddy, Javier, Jose, Jon, and BMac (in no particular order). Almost every other team in baseball next year will break camp with 5 starters, even if some of them aren't that good. The Sox also have 3 of those starters (Mark, Freddy, and Javier) currently signed up to pitch in the "World Baseball Classic" next spring. This will likely add extra innings to their totals, and 4 of those guys pitched heavy loads last year through a long playoff run. So here's what I'd like to know. Given the WBC and the playoffs last year giving our guys extra work, and the sheer amount of talent we have on our starting staff, should we consider using a 6 man rotation, even if it's just for a limited time during the year. Here's your options: Yes, we should, at least for a time. The extra rest will help people, and it will likely help build trade value for our pitchers once the season starts. Yes we should, but it should be a 2nd option - if we can find someone who will give us a potential all-star in exchange for Jon or Jose (whichever one won't sign) we should pull the trigger on the trade first. The extra rest isn't as important as getting good value. No, we shouldn't...it's insanity to think of giving up a roster spot to an extra starting pitcher when that pitcher could get us something of value in a trade...we should move a starter, preferably someone who's not under contract for 07, to whatever team gives us the best offer, even if it's not fair to us. No we shouldn't - we should either start 1 pitcher off in the bullpen or 1 pitcher (Basically BMac) off at AAA. We could use the long relief, and it will give guys like Vazquez and BMac time to work out any problems they might have. Well, what do you think? 6 man rotation or no?

QUOTE(Sox Hustler @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 02:13 PM) Congrats Neal. I am sure this makes him feel kinda good. Speaking of Cotts do you guys think he will ever be a starter again? It seems like he will be a closer before a starter again. I've actually read in a couple places since the Vazquez trade that the Sox may wind up wiht Neal starting at some point in the future, but that's only if/when we start losing people. If I'm Neal, I look out and see how much money people are spending on quality relief pitching, and think "Maybe I just want to stay right where I am." Anywho...Congrats Neal...wish I could buy you a shot o' whiskey to celebrate.