Balta1701

QUOTE(HineyBird @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 11:17 AM) no one is talking about the Broncos I think they might get over the hump that is the dome playing Indianapolis colts. it also seems like the NFL has figured out the Colts offense. Also the bears could play a home playoff game this year. I don't think the NFL has figured out the Colts offense at all. I think Peyton Manning has realized that it makes his defense a lot better if his offense isn't such a quick-strike, off the field in 30 seconds sort of offense all the time. Yeah, it's fun to watch them score 45 a game, but it helps their team a lot more if they score 28, but hold the ball for 35-40 minutes.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 01:45 PM) I just dont want them to repeat the end of 04-05, with 4 straight losses in the playoffs. I don't know if I'd complain about that, because that would mean that the Bulls did in fact make the playoffs for a 2nd year in a row.

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 03:01 PM) I met a boy today who is a geo-chemist. He told me a lot of interesting research in that field I changed the subject as fast as I could. Who do you think you're talking to here?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 03:02 PM) Yeah, we went over that in the tutorial. I turmed PA onto the buauty that us U-235 for dating the really old stuff. Like Bea Arthur's lingerie, for example. Actually, it's both U235 and U238. They're vastly more powerful when you use them togehter, and you can measure them at the same time.

QUOTE(Felix @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:56 PM) well, in my mind (not Ozzie's, but still), Cotts is good enough against lefties for that to work I would tend to agree, but that would mean that Ozzie would have to a.) be more willing to allow Cotts to throw to both righties and lefties (i.e. when a team plays a lefty-righty-lefty-righty batting order), and he'd have to be more willing to let guys like Cliffy and Hermy attack the lefties. Of course, this all assumes that the guys we have will be able to put up similiar numbers next year to what they did this year...one thing we've seen in baseball lately is that the performance of relief pitching from year to year can be a very, very fickle thing.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:55 PM) It's from a PM that I sent to Jim. I got "yelled" at by some of the guys in my study because I said I don't necessarily buy into what creationist scientist say. Carbon dating, for instance has been explained to me and I don't understand the big deal. chaos will hopefully be averted, we'll see Only anthropologists really care about "Carbon" dating. You want the real fun of the earth...you need to talk about more general radiometric dating, using far more isotopes than just C-14. Ooh I'm just itching for another quality evolution thread.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 01:57 PM) Thread of the year Dude, versus the Rally Crede?

Ah, and now I see why that'll never happen. You have only 1 lefty reliever. Ozzie this year seemed to adore having 2 of them.

QUOTE(Felix @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:35 PM) Timo likely won't be here, and Blum has already filed for FA. Two spots right there. What is Timo's contract status? Everett is also gone, so that's a roster spot there also. So we've freed up 3 roster spots. Now let's plug guys in. Brian Anderson. Frank Thomas?. Do you want Gload with that 3rd spot, and if so, are you comfortable with Pablo being your only backup on the left side of the infield (other than, of course, Jermaine Dye and Chris Widger.)

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:26 PM) You still counting Brandon as a prospect or no? He no longer qualifies as a rookie in the eyes of MLB. As far as I'm concerned, he's our 5th starter next year.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:07 PM) Where is the end to this joke? How f'n dumb are the Cubs, already?!!? (p.s. I think bringing Rusch back was a smart move by the Cubs. I think he will perform well in whatever role he is given, but shuffling him back and forth from starter to reliever hurt him more than anything) When you have Kerry Wood and Mark Prior and Dusty Baker and Carlos Zambrano on your team, you sure better plan to have a guy who can shuffle back between starting and the bullpen, if not 2 of them.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:26 PM) He was still good for us the whole year, though. His worst month was July, and he was able to hit .250 in that month... I'm not looking at Gload as a full-time player, but there's no reason he shouldn't be on the Sox' bench next year. He instantly gives us a decent bat there, something this team has lacked for a while. Don't get me wrong, I do like the idea of Gload on the bench...I just start to worry about roster spots. This year, we simply didn't have room for Gload...especially since he could only really play 1 position. The reason we traded for Blum instead of using Gload was that we needed an extra backup guy who could back up 3rd or short, especially when Crede's back was hurt and we didn't know how he'd be affected. (turned out to be very little once he got his swing straight & his hand healed). I think there probably should be room for Gload next year, but I think the fact that Anderson can play all 3 outfield positions quite well and therefore give 4 guys extra rest makes him more useful than Gload.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:22 PM) I actually wouldn't mind a platoon of the two. I think it's a good way to ease Anderson into the big leagues, while keeping good production at the same time. Of course, I know some dislike the idea of Anderson not being a full-time starter, but I can see it's advantages... Which is exactly why I like the idea of an Anderson/Thomas alternation. You don't exactly go lefty-righty, but there's really not that much more Anderson is going to learn if he's put in AAA, he can clearly help our ballclub next year, he's very cheap, and he gives us the opportunity to hold onto a gigantic bat with very little monetary risk associated with it. Plus, how many great ballplayers started off their first year or two in some sort of a platoon situation? And on top of that, how much healthier could we keep guys like Pods and Dye if our outfield not only got 1 day off out of 3, but if on another day, another outfielder got to DH because we put Anderson in the field twice?

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:19 PM) Why would there be a dropoff in production from Gload to Anderson. Did I miss something? Was Anderson the one who put up the 115 OPS+ in 2004, in a decent-to-good amount of ABs? Just to point out...that was only 234 at bats you're talking about, and many of them were at the end of the season when the Sox were basically out of the playoff chase.

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:16 PM) I'd rather have Anderson than Gload. If there is a dropoff in production from Gload to Anderson-and that is not a complete given-then its probably worth it for Andersons long term development. Plus, you can fill a DH spot later if you want to via trade That's another thing worth noting...there's almost always an adequate player available on the trade market in the early/middle part of the season if you really want to make the deal. Think about the Cardinals getting Larry Walker 2 years ago, or the constant trade rumors around Mike Sweeney.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2005 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 02:03 PM) And what are our options those other 3 to 4 hundred at bat's at dh? Brian Anderson. Put him in the Carl Everett role from this year - spelling Frank every 2nd day, and spelling an outfielder every 3rd day. He'll pick up somehting like 400 at bats, plus or minus 100, improve our bench, improve our outfield defense, and improve our team speed.

The Indians did probably play the best ball in the 2nd half excluding the month of October...and seriously come on, until we sign Konerko and decide who's DHing for us it's hard to put us higher than them, given that they know who their lineup is. If the Indians lost all their free agents - Wickman, Millwood, Howry, etc., they would no where near suffer as much as the White Sox would if they lost Konerko, Thomas, Everett. If our team comes back in tact with a fairly healthy Frank Thomas or some adequate replacement and a 5th starter named Brandon next year...then you better believe me, Cleveland ought to be f***ing frightened. But until then...we

Can I just say how relieved it makes me to actually know it was Lawton? This thread scared the s*** out of me last week.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 01:46 PM) Frank has been given a shot the past couple years. He hasn't been healthy, now is the time to say goodbye. Sure he can be great when he's on the field, but he isn't on the field all the time and I'd rather have a guy who can put up 90% of Frank's production and be on the field the entire season. Frank Thomas has had 1 injury the past 2 years. Just 1. The same foot that he was rehabbing last year was still bothering him when he came back, and it's now the same one that he's rehabbing again. While that's not a pleasant thought; consider this. It's 1 singular injury to heal. Just 1 injury. It's not like he's got a broken ankle, 7 torn ligaments in his knees, and a bad back. It's 1 specific spot that's currently giving him trouble. Even more so, think for a second about how the injury originally happened; fielding a ground ball by Juan Pierre. In other words...he was playing 1b, not just serving as a DH. If he did come back, this situation would almost never happen, unless we hit inning 14 of a world series game in a national league park and we needed to pinch run for Konerko. If he can be back, don't underestimate him. And also, don't overestimate this injury. Yeah it's been bad, but it's still just 1 injury.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 01:11 PM) That being said...I was huge for Lawton. Jody Gerut for Matt Lawton? That's basically f***in Joe Borchard for Matt Lawton. I do that in a f***in' second. He was playing for the Yankees at the end of the season I believe. Remember, in significance: Yankee backup >>> World Series MVP.

Can someone go find the people who were pissed back in September that we had made no effort to acquire Lawton at the trading deadline?

QUOTE(3E8 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 09:55 AM) ruh roh. As young as the Injuns currently are, they've got a good chance to be a player. But here's the big question; will they hold onto Millwood and Wickman? The answer is probably not, and those are going to be some serious holes they'll need to fill.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 09:47 AM) If we don't resign Paulie, I'll be advocating a trade for Ryan Howard. While that would be wonderful...I worry the price for a guy who is soon to have an ROY trophy to prove that he can hit ML Pitching may just now be too high. I wouldn't have minded if we took a look at him before last year, and put a real good offer on the table for the Phils to see if they'd bite given that they had a logjam with a seemingly healthy Thome then, but now I think his price has gone up even more.

QUOTE(Frank the Tank 35 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 09:44 AM) Is there a possibility of a 3-way? Angels-D'backs-BoSox? I believe that was at least hinted at on the previous page of this thread.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 09:04 AM) im sure Bush would ask some genius questions. As he always does. Are you guys the real leakers?