caulfield12

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 24, 2012 -> 01:34 AM) I'm disliked because I back Ozzie big time and back some of the players who are (were) hated. Like Jenks, Jermaine, Wise, Pods, Juan Pierre, CQ, etc. And I don't like Kenny and blast Rios and Dunn a lot. I also praise Rongey and Hawk and Cowley and am disliked for that as well. Jermaine was one of the most popular Sox players during his tenure. We were all frustrated with Jenks' conditioning and "motivation" the last couple of seasons, but he usually got the job done, except against the Twins. Wise (everyone accepted he was maximizing his ability in 2008 with us), Pods and CQ were never hated here. Pierre...once again, frustration, like Jenks, but nobody questioned his effort or work ethic or his leadership. It was obvious he lost his burst with the Sox and was no longer the baserunning threat he once was (we saw Pods go through the same issues) and his defense was pretty atrocious in some key losses early in 2011. He didn't show up when we needed him most in the early months of the season. But hated, no...blindly loved and supported, no again.

Missed that...well, in that scenario, Floyd makes a lot more sense for them than Oswalt. But Oswalt's the sexier pick for the fans in Boston than Gavin. We'll see which way Cherington decides to go.

Oswalt is expected to get $7-9 million, that's pretty similar to Gavin's deal, and then there's the $9.5 million option on Floyd for 2013.

Except the last thing they want to do is move Beckham again, even for just a couple of games. Viciedo, no way. Has to be Lilli, Kuhn, Martinez or Escobar. McPherson with a VERY outside shot because of his ability to play that position.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 08:28 PM) I believe Delwyn Young is not related to Delmon or Dmitri. Just assumed with the same first names beginning with D that they were all related. I stand corrected.

What could/should Bell have done? Gone out with his own personal checkbook and scoured the Dominican? We've brought Santos, Sale, Beckham, Morel, Lillibridge, Viciedo, Reed, DeAza, Axelrod, Kuhn, Flowers, etc., to the majors under his tenure. Guess I have to be willing to overlook Teahen, that was one big miss on his part, advocating for that particular deal. That's the goal of a minor league system...to promote its players internally and/or trade them for major league ready players.

Seems the AL Central is stuck with the Young brothers for now.

Kate Beckinsale=pretty hot, not much else to say about the rest of Underworld. Felt about as memorable as your typical computer game these days. At least SUCKER PUNCH stuck with me, for better or worse. Watching TERRI and TRUST, two indie favorites.

Not very much mention of Jake Peavy and Chris Sale. To me, those guys are just as much key as the Axis of Evil Offense last year.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 04:01 PM) MDGonzales Mark Gonzales The 10 players within the sox's org. invited to ST are longshots, but it will be interesting to watch their development, especially (cont.) RHP Jacob Petricka, C Michael Blanke, Kuhn, and OFs Jared Mitchell, Trayce Thompson and Jordan Danks. Why is Jordan Danks still interesting, Mark? You'd have to think Martinez would be favored over Escobar due to his overall positional versatility...or even Kuhn over Escobar. Better to let Escobar play everyday in the minors and keep trying to get incremental improvements out of that bat, which is looking Caruso-Esteban Beltreish for the moment.

Listen on Crain, but prepared not to be bowled over. (And he's needed for Reed "insurance/depth.") With Oliver and Rhodes two of the best LHR FA's previously avail on the market, he's moveable without eating any of that contract. More FA signings of Cubans/Latin players. Hire the Marco Paddy of the Asian baseball world...as well as being on the cutting edge in Brazil and India to develop Sox academies there.

At that price, for those years, the White Sox were better off with Danks than Buehrle. Unless you're going to take the position we should bring back Crede, Jenks, Uribe and Rowand...just because. If they kept Buehrle but lost Danks, they would be even worse off, because Danks is a valued commodity at those rates, whereas Buerhle will need salary going with him somewhere in order to be dealt in the event of a total Marlins collapse.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 10:55 AM) Because Bost has Gonzalez at first and Ortiz at DH. If you trade Alexei, what's the point in keeping Konerko on the roster? There's no way they compete in 2012 or 2013 with Escobar, Martinez or Lillibridge at SS. http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/7...cash-roy-oswalt Maybe Marty believes we can compete with Nick Punto or Michael Aviles as our starting SS...

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 21, 2012 -> 06:18 PM) I think the Red Sox could afford Ramirez and Floyd or Oswalt, but I don't think they have enough prospects to make it worth the Sox while. Ramirez to Boston, Floyd to Toronto would be intriguing. why keep Konerko around then? what's the point?

QUOTE (Cali @ Jan 19, 2012 -> 06:58 PM) Snydergaard? Deck? Do any of the Jays prospects have real names? Isn't that the Swedish actor who plays the malevolent Vanger brother in DRAGON TATTOO?

Guess he's going to often be confused with the former Sox closer unless he goes by Heredia, like GIL.

The report I read said that Carlos got a belt notch or two above $7 million.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Jan 19, 2012 -> 04:12 PM) I would be willing to bet my life savings that the sox will open this year with a payroll right around $100M, give or take a few million bucks. Every single thing any representative of the sox, or any writer, or any move the sox have made all points to one direction, a lower payroll of around $100M. There is no one else to move, there is no one else to acquire and we are at $103M like I said. The sox have lowered season ticket prices by about 20%, usually we see ticket price increases/decreases proportional to the amount at which payroll increases/decreases. There are no indications to think my statement that keys in on a $100M major league payroll are erroneous in any way shape and form. You can wait for official word and opening day reports, and Ill use intuition, logic, and facts to deduce a reasonable answer in the meantime. Floyd Thornton Crain Ohman AJ Any of those guys could easily be sold to the highest bidder before the season still, particularly Floyd and Matty. Those are the five top candidates, along with Peavy and possibly Konerko or Alexei in the unlikely case of a disastrous 36-56 start and abysmal attendance numbers.

After all, he’s (Prince Fielder) done his time in the market where everything must go right in order to contend. And he has his suitors in Seattle, Washington, maybe Chicago (North Side), Miami, Baltimore and Toronto. Through no fault of his own, it appears his timing is simply crummy. The Yankees and Red Sox are both set at first base and perhaps diving for the luxury tax threshold. The Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Mets are utter wrecks financially. The Chicago White Sox are, well, I don’t know what they are. The Angels opted for Pujols. Passan/yahoosports.com

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 19, 2012 -> 03:33 PM) Nearly every team can be surprise contenders if everyone plays well. It's baseball, the best teams every year only win like 65% of their games -- there is a ton of space for streaks and career years to make a difference. But all of that does NOT make it prudent to plan on everything breaking correctly with tens of millions of dollars at stake. Yes, we would all be happier if every offseason's theme was to add veterans stars, but that's just not possible. No matter how much money you think ownership has, they can not and will not just continue to add payroll until they bankrupt themselves. Yes, the Cubs will suck next year, but that's because Hendry drove them into the ground with wanton aggression every year, throwing big money at the best player available at the time without any concern for anything beyond the next season. Now, they're mired in a state of sustained mediocrity without any chance of getting better quickly because they have $150m tied up in garbage players on long-term contracts, and depressingly few decent prospects to come up and outplay the dead weight. What options do they have? Would the fans rather see an expensive team suck it up or a young team with a promising future suck it up? If you think the White Sox or the Cubs should be further mortgaging the future on the slight chance that all of their bad players will turn it around and have great years, you either have no understanding of basic economics or think the world will end after 2012. I'm sick of hearing people hate on KW offseason strategy by acting like he WANTS to lose. He may or may not be making bad decisions, but he's doing it while trying to build you a winner the best way he knows how -- and unlike so many fans, he understands that he may not be able to do it right now and is aware that the decisions he makes now will affect his ability to succeed in the not-so-distant future. It's not as simple as "get good players or get bad players." And finally, to everyone (not necessarily you) who is complaining about JR being stingy: please realize that last year's payroll was SIGNIFICANTLY higher than any payroll in White Sox history. Except 75% of the blame for what happened with the Cubs should be placed on prior management (not so much Hendry) thinking those aforementioned splashy names would drive up the asking price/NAV of the franchise at the time of sale...and also for maxxing out the performance of the team at a time when others were kicking the tyres about a possible purchase. And there's still a decent chance this White Sox team can at least be competitive in 2012. Can't really say the same for the Cubs.

Will Daniel Hudson finally hit a wall this season and go backwards?

Coriolanus with Ralfe Fiennes and Gerard Butler was good Shakespearean entertainment... Worth checking out. Took we about 20-30 minutes to adjust to the accents (kind of like Attack the Block, hopeless without subtitles in ENG), but you get used to the rhythm of the language after that initial shock. I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping... BY ROGER EBERT / December 28, 2011 Box office revenue at movie theaters "lagged far behind 2010," an article by the AP's David Germain reports. Partly that was because the year lacked an "Avatar." Partly because a solid summer slate fell off in the autumn. Germain talks to several Hollywood insiders who tried to account for the general decline of ticket sales; 2011 had "smallest movie audience since 1995." I have some theories of my own, fueled by what people tell me. 1. Obviously, the absence of a must-see mass-market movie. When moviegoers hear about "Avatar" or "The Dark Knight," they blast off from home base and land in a theater seat as quickly as they can. 2. Ticket prices are too high. People have always made that complaint, but historically the movies have been cheap compared to concerts, major league sports and restaurants. Not so much any longer. No matter what your opinion is about 3D, the charm of paying a hefty surcharge has worn off for the hypothetical family of four. 3. The theater experience. Moviegoers above 30 are weary of noisy fanboys and girls. The annoyance of talkers has been joined by the plague of cell-phone users, whose bright screens are a distraction. Worse, some texting addicts get mad when told they can't use their cell phones. A theater is reportedly opening which will allow and even bless cell phone usage, although that may be an apocryphal story. 4. Refreshment prices. It's an open secret that the actual cost of soft drinks and popcorn is very low. To justify their inflated prices, theaters serve portions that are grotesquely oversized, and no longer offer what used to be a "small popcorn." Today's bucket of popcorn would feed a thoroughbred. 5. Competition from other forms of delivery. Movies streaming over the internet are no longer a sci-fi fantasy. TV screens are growing larger and cheaper. Consumers are finding devices that easily play internet movies through TV sets. Netflix alone accounts for 30% of all internet traffic in the evening. That represents millions of moviegoers. They're simply not in a theater. This could be seen as an argument about why newspapers and their readers need movie critics more than ever; the number of choices can be baffling. 6. Lack of choice. Box-office tracking shows that the bright spot in 2011 was the performance of indie, foreign or documentary films. On many weekends, one or more of those titles captures first-place in per-screen average receipts. Yet most moviegoers outside large urban centers can't find those titles in their local gigantiplex. Instead, all the shopping center compounds seem to be showing the same few overhyped disappointments. Those films open with big ad campaigns, play a couple of weeks, and disappear. The myth that small-town moviegoers don't like "art movies" is undercut by Netflix's viewing results; the third most popular movie on Dec. 28 on Netflix was "Certified Copy," by the Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami. You've heard of him? In fourth place--French director Alain Corneau's "Love Crime." In fifth, "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo"--but the subtitled Swedish version. The message I get is that Americans love the movies as much as ever. It's the theaters that are losing their charm. Proof: theaters thrive that police their audiences, show a variety of titles and emphasize value-added features. The rest of the industry can't depend forever on blockbusters to bail it out. .

Hence, the Mariners not trading Ichiro and the White Sox holding onto Konerko (presumably over Buehrle, although if the situation was reversed, they wouldn't have traded Buehrle, with two years left on his deal, in order to be able to free up money to keep Paulie, would they?). Maybe...

That was our interpretation, that the Sox were concerned about the health of Drabek (due to the reduced velocity and K numbers) and that he was the other key piece involved in the trade.

We Bought a Zoo is quite the underrated little flick. Usually a fan of Cameron Crowe films, and nice to see the actor from ALMOST FAMOUS, Patrick Fugit, again. Not sure where this film went wrong on the marketing side, but it should have done much better than it did at the box office. (See Hugo, Young Adult and War Horse). http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20483133_20556657,00.html B- Review for Red Tails at ew.com B- for Haywire/Gina Carano A for Miss Bala, one of the 9 foreign language finalists for Oscar (100% A SEPARATION deserves to win)