lostfan

They'll probably draft a burner to replace Knox - Hester was supposed to be that guy and was an unmitigated disaster. Someone to put in the slot. Marshall can play in the slot, but as a gimmick, they need somewhere to play full-time. Right now they have all possession guys and nobody who really stretches the field, or draws the safety out of the box. Marshall does his best work underneath. Jeffery is like a mini-Marshall who's slightly less physical and slightly better at getting separation, although Marshall doesn't even really need separation. That was the one thing Knox was really good at, running those 9 routes.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 10:18 AM) Bears are said to have interest in Zach Ertz. Am I the only one (obviously besides the FO) that is thoroughly intrigued by the dynamic of potentially having Marshall, M. Bennett, Jeffery, and Zach Ertz all lined up on the field at the same time? Thats gotta be tough to defend. Defenses would pretty much have to put LBs on Bennett and Ertz which would mean less of a pass rush coming at Jay. Ertz at 20 is a stretch though, maybe they are looking at him should they be able to trade down. Or trying to get someone else to trade up to take him

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 09:24 AM) I don't agree that the NL has caught up at all. You have your cream - Washington, Atlanta, Cincinnati, St. Louis, San Francisco, LA, and you can throw Arizona in there as well - but the Phillies are nothing more than a .500 team, the Mets are SCRAPPY but not a talented bunch, the Marlins are one of the two worst teams in baseball, the Pirates are going to be .500 or worse, the Brewers are mediocre, the Cubs are terrible, the Rockies are terrible (even if they've played well to open the year), and the Padres are not very good. I'd say Philadelphia is probably at the top of the best of the worst, and I would say only Minnesota and Houston are definitively worse than them. You just named like... half of the NL

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 5, 2013 -> 04:01 PM) In like 1990 I could have believed that they were an integral part. People up on the roof grilling across the street, maybe a dozen people who actually lived in the building, just a bit of local flair. Now they're 20 row deep bleachers that the park doesn't control, where the building owners make out with some fraction of the team's ticket sales. Can we call the rooftop owners moochers?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2013 -> 09:42 AM) Apparently I got a flux capacitor for Easter, because that would involve going back in time to 2008. That is the last time he played more than 106 games in a season. Also Dunn's .800 OPS last year was greater than anything that Grady has put up since 2008. If we're doing that can we just bring back Frank Thomas? Please?

Grady Sizemore? Seriously? Is it 2006? *checks calendar*

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 04:20 PM) I think you do need a mix. If you are all sabermetrics and nothing else, or all old school scouting and no sabermetrics, I think you aren't going to win. The perfect formula is a mix, and how that mix is weighted probably fluxuates year to year. Moneyball really got it going, but one of the reasons for Beane's success early was he had the pitching in place. He made some wise moves based on sabermetrics, but might not have had Mulder, Hudson, Zito if he didn't depend as much on scouting earlier. Beane's thing was looking at factors other people hadn't caught onto, and getting extra value for his smaller budget out of it. It has less impact now that everyone's more or less onto that, though.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 04:02 PM) I love how Hawk was like "what I need is some guys who want to win baseball games..." That is where the problem lies here...the real answer is something in between the numbers and the unquantifiable...but both sides seem to want to outright dismiss the other... To me, that sounds like people saying Louisville just "wanted it more" than Michigan the other day. That sounds ridiculous. Michigan didn't want to win the championship that bad and that's why they lost? I thought it was because they were getting outrebounded and couldn't defend in the second half but eh. Having said that, intagibles DO exist and you have to "play the game" and that's not just a cliche. I think sometimes some "sabermetrics people" (for lack of a better phrase to describe them) get carried away trying to get away from dumb Joe Morgan type analysis and head in the extreme opposite direction.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 04:01 PM) ...until the second he uses it, creates an inevitable paradox that goes with all time travel, and that link (and all other links), and these posts all disappear from existence/memory and we/nobody else ever heard of a guy that never existed. but he says he can only tell the future and not the past.

"sabermetrics" tends to mean whatever people who don't like it want it to mean to make whatever point they're trying to make at that given moment. Baseball has always been a game of numbers and all sabermetrics do is go deeper into those numbers and what they might mean. While there are people who hang onto numbers a little too much, dismissing them outright is just nonsense. When you find out a fast player you think of as a base stealer is only stealing at a 50% rate and that hurts more than it helps, you don't keep having him attempt steals do you? Unless your name rhymes with Rozzie Duillen.

MJ never slept on anyone his entire life. If any of them were lucky enough to get 1-2 buckets on him he'd go nuts and destroy them.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 10:57 AM) All of 1, and they should have won that game had Peavy not gotten torched. Placing that game on Robin, it was clear Peavy was done, but Robin sent him back out to face the heart of the order. Sigh

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 10:59 AM) Only Williams-Goss got it right He would get his ass kicked badly and it wouldn't even be close. Correct answer. You MIGHT be able to get 2, 3 on Jordan today.

Some of the responses by these kids are hilarious. There are actual NBA players who still have a hard time beating MJ one-on-one TODAY and he is 50 years old. http://www.usatodayhss.com/st-louis/articl...-on-one--374380

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 09:28 PM) http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/b...0,6302884.story Seems like someone does this every couple years

Tried making the same point about the guy who stabbed all those kids in China on the same day of the Sandy Hook tragedy. None of those kids died and all of them made full recovery. They'll hear what they want to hear though. If I never hear another stupid gun rant on Facebook it'll be too soon. You can't talk to these people - "I know banning guns is unconstitutional, but we need to expand background checks and look into straw purchase reform because the laws aren't working and easy to circumvent" reads to them as "I want Obama to confiscate everyone's guns, and use those guns to force people to allow atheists to teach kids how to have gay sex in public schools, and teach girls how to perform do-it-yourself abortions at home."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 11, 2013 -> 08:33 AM) Yet, they have been able to use those very minor league players to get pretty much the entire roster assembled. White Sox management is kind of the opposite of Bulls management. Very savvy with trades and contract negotiations. Can't draft worth a hot s***. Bulls management will strike gold on a late first-round prospect who develops into a solid rotation player then overpay him, then refuse to trade some overrated low-ceiling player when an impact player is available for trade.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 07:15 PM) So only 1/4 of our fanbase actually wants to attend more games when the team is playing well for an extended period of time in a particular season? If you really believe that, then you're implying that the rest of our fanbase doesn't care about winning at all (they'll attend a set number of games regardless of current performance) or they need a successful, completed season before they'll start attending more games. I call bulls*** on that. I think the issue comes down to money and hopefully the price cuts help with that. This is any fanbase in any sport, not just us. Think of everyone you know who is into sports to any degree. Do ALL of them go to games religiously multiple times per year? You can say "yes! of course they do!" but I would toss your bulls*** flag back at your feet. You know people with season tickets, you know people who go to 10 or so games a year, you know people who would like to go but are unemployed or money is tight, you know people who usually check out 1-2 games a year, you know people who only watch on TV, you know people who just casually follow the team. There's all types of different fans who spend their money in different ways they deem fit. You seem to be assuming all of them behave the same.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 03:23 PM) Actually, Wednesday's for Lostfan are typically spent down on the corner pimping out hoes and talking buiness with Stringer Bell... That is tomorrow afternoon actually.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 03:12 PM) You could be referencing 1908... /topic

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) Yeah, I agree...but can you see the clear demarcation between those that lived through that time and followed that team and those that were too young to remember or were yet to be born? That team literally was a sports phenomenon...of any sports teams of the last 30 years in major American Professional Sport, that is probably in your top 5 for dominance of their peers, historical dominance, colorful/interesting characters, and cultural relevance. Add to that the coach, the fact that it took place in a major market, and the fact that it was the League's charter franchise, and there you have it. Yes, we need to stop comparing every Bears team to the '85 team...but expecting people to forget about that year because it was 28 seasons ago or whatever...not going to happen. That's not what I'm talking about, though. I mean the type of people who clamor for the Bears to hire (insert name of '85 player) here as a coach just because of the name even though they've got no actual coaching credentials. Or ignore the ones who have coached but actually have a strong track record of failure like Singletary and Rivera, and yes, even Ditka later on. Or, the ones who will intently listen to Jim McMahon's opinion on how Cutler is doing even though he is going senile and says he doesn't watch games... or the inane ramblings of Gale Sayers, who doesn't follow the team either (I know Sayers isn't an '85 Bear, but it's the same phenomenon). I want to ban all these people from the internet and any interaction with the media.

QUOTE (My_Sox_Summer @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 02:56 PM) I don't know. I would think other teams fanbases WOULD show up when the team was doing good. There are exceptions, of course. The O's struggled as much as we did, but they MADE the playoffs and still couldn't sell tickets. The Marlins despite winning a WS couldn't sell tickets. So that is us? In a huge market and can't sell tickets? The dedicated core of fans shows up anyways, not just when they are winning. If we can't expect our fanbase to jump on the bandwagon before the playoffs, we're effed for regular season attendance. Being that it is 80+ games, that really hurts the bottom line and hampers payroll among other things. So some are expecting the Sox to create a winner (for more than 3 years) with less money? Isn't that an unreal expectation? Orioles fans are jaded, Baltimore is (or used to be) a strong baseball town, but they were pretty irritated with their management and ownership and just said f*** it. Until last year, they hadn't finished above .500 since I think 1997, and they had a couple of tease years where they'd lead the division at the All-Star break and then fall apart. Eventually, if they maintain this, they'll stop being dormant and start coming to games again, now that they have a team actually worth watching. The Sox, on the other hand, they draw what they draw. But I would wait until at least Memorial Day to make any meaningful conclusions. We're one week into April, April baseball doesn't mean s*** by summer.

I'll be somewhere out in right-center

QUOTE (ptatc @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 02:32 PM) I agree with the others. That team was so dominate that it will go down in history as one of the best. It is like the steel curtain, it will always be talked about as one of the best teams of all time, due to the defense and Payton. It deserves to be talked about. QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 02:37 PM) LOL, let me know the next time a team puts up 2 shut outs in the playoffs and/or outscores their opponents 91-10 in the post season. They were up by 40 when that TD was scored. Guys... there is talking about it... ...and there is talking about it like it happened two months ago. The first one is ok... that's what sports fans do. The second one is pretty pathetic and embarrassing. More than anything, that is a pretty painful reminder that the team hasn't done s*** in almost 30 years.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 10, 2013 -> 02:03 PM) I was only talking about single game tickets. I already acknowledged season tickets require sustained or established success. My point is pretty simple. If it's 80+ degrees in July and the Sox are in first place, I'm going to as many games as I possibly can. I could care less how they did last year or how they might do next year. I want to enjoy the team now while they're actually good. But that is you. YOU. Those are things you do. You can't expect everyone to mimic your behavior simultaneously. There is a relatively small, dedicated core of fans that do this, probably 1/4 the fanbase if that. Then there is everyone else.