ThunderBolt

QUOTE (MO2005 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 02:50 PM) So Kenny has to do something this off-season. The last 2 times he sat back we failed miserably! I am not going to go through that bulls**t again. Marquez, Betemit,Nunez,Gimore, Rodriquez, Flowers Lillbridge, Nix, Viciedo. Van Bendenschoten. Am I missing somebody? That’s not nobody, my friend.

Speculation that the White Sox entering the FA market is contingent on a Dye for pitching trade. http://danny-knobler.blogs.sportsline.com/...e=rss_blogs_MLB

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) Maybe we should try a new party here in IL. Maybe a couple years under the Green or Libertarian party would do us good. Nay, Vote Bull Moose! You'll have a Bully Good Time!

Dunn's gone. The problem with Burell is that he wants a lot of years in a contract.

Looks like we’ll finally be getting that epic Wood/Getz duel we’ve all been waiting for. V Martinez: “Kerry, throw him the slider!” Wood: “I can’t! His grinderness, that swagger, h-he’s like a TWIN!!!” Wedge: Uh-oh.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 01:12 PM) willy taveras And here we all thought that grindeyness could only get you so far.

Hmmm… the Reds just got 3 million from the Orioles. I’m assuming we’d be willing to chip in what it would of cost for a Uribe (4.5) So, I’m guessing it’s a fight over roughly 3-4 mill.

I'm still crossing my fingers for the Dye for Bailey/Dickerson trade. With us slotting Dickerson in LF, and Lillibridge at 2b. Giving us a crazy athletic roster that we haven't had since the Mike Cameron era. Lillibridge Dickerson Q Thome Konerko Missle AJ Fields Anderson Also, we had this debate already, but i'm still for a Dunn/Bradley signing, but if the Bailey trade goes through we'll call that a wash.

Absolutely ridiculous contract. No team should have this much power to sign everybody they want. There's no players that the Yankees can't buy. Still…. Screw ‘em, we’ll still beat them.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 02:17 AM) I actually thought it was quite retarded. I really can see where you’d get that impression. I think the fact that it’s on at 3, and I’m half delusional by then, adds to the entertainment.

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 11:08 PM) ^^^^^ Wow, the 3rd and 4th seeds in my fantasy league just went down. So, i'm in a pretty good place right nown (2nd Vs 6th)

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 02:13 AM) Even if you don't watch Fox News ever, if you get a night where you can't sleep or are pulling an all nighter, Red Eye is worth a look. It's on at like 2 in the morning and is REALLY strange, but everytime I have seen it I found it to be hysterical. Plus, it helped me discover Patti Ann Browne, who is quite hot even though I'd guess she's almost 40 years old. I get a kick out of the show too. Even if most of the jokes fall flat, the host has such a demeanor about him that you can’t help but be entertained.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 01:29 AM) Take a gander at that rotation in 2000, and what started in the playoffs for us. Parque, Sirotka, and Baldwin. :Shudder:. Game 2: The famed origin of shouldergate.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 01:26 AM) I think record in 1 and 2 run games is just as important, if not more important, than run differential. Throw out the 2006 stats and I bet you'll see an even greater spread than 2005 or 2008. For that matter, you can also include 2000 for comparison's sake. Those teams would score 10 runs one night and get shut out the next by an ace, crafty lefthander, journeyman, unknown rookie or someone we'd never scouted before. Let's just do the Ozzie years. 2004 Scored 865 runs, Allowed 831 runs 2005 Scored 741 runs, Allowed 645 runs. 2006 Scored 868 runs, Allowed 794 runs. 2007 Scored 693 runs, Allowed 839 runs 2008 Scored 811 runs, Allowed 729 runs That's some strong evidence showing just how much pitching has meant to this team over the last few years. 2005, being the prime example.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 01:12 AM) wtf is up with your avatar? I believe that Jose Valentin's family.

2005 Chicago White Sox Scored 741 runs, Allowed 645 runs. 2008 Chicago White Sox Scored 811 runs, Allowed 729 runs Huh, so what have we learned today?

My two favorite Earl Weaverisms: On offense, your most precious possessions are your 27 outs".- Earl Weaver "If you play for one run, that's all you'll get"- Earl Weaver

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 01:38 PM) Weenie and The Butt hmm... a Family Guy reference.

It’s a double-edged sabermetric sword. How many runs do you think we failed to score by having Tadahito lay down a bunt? What if he’d singled? Or doubled? Would not him actually being on base for Everett, Konerko, Dye and Crash Rowand have provided us the opportunity more runs?

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 11:43 PM) "You're a smart wippersnapper, son" You got me. I really wish I was around for the Earl Weaver era. Part of my mentality comes from the whole moneyball philosophy, the other from broadcasting a season of collegiate games where the manager insisted on bunting with everyone no matter how ridiculous the situation. He was like the Dusty Baker of collegiate baseball.

Why would you ever give away an out in the 1st inning, when you have Q, Thome, and Konerko coming up? With our lineup the homer, or an extra-base hit is always a possibility. Why sacrifice that opportunity just to advance a runner? Also, there are many things that can help advance a runner, a sac-fly, a ground-out, a base hit, or a walk. I don’t think it should be priority for a team to have someone’s whose sole function is to take himself out of the equation as soon as possible. I don't see the bunt as sound baseball strategy unless, you are absolutely certain the runner will score from second.

Dye to Braves was a non-issue. Teams haven't talked since Javy trade. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnerId=rss_cws

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 11:15 PM) They need a number two hitter that can put down a Sac bunt. Someone who can put down the sac bunt is not one of our greatest needs. Not unless the signing of that someone guarantees we’ll have the winning run on, with no one out in the 9th every night.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 10:35 PM) BTW, looks like Taveras is off the table. Uh-oh, deal's off. http://blogs.denverpost.com/rockies/2008/1...s-swap-off-now/

Bulls>Knicks just like old times.