baggio202 Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 so what did frank say...anyone hear it??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molto Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 nothing yet. I think ESPN decided not to show it. he was supposed to do it after practice, which I thought would end earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedPinStripes Posted February 22, 2003 Share Posted February 22, 2003 Frank needs money too bad to retire. They'll have to cut him when he's 43 to get him to retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 so what did frank say...anyone hear it??? Saw a little blurb on CLuelessTV, and he still seemed a little bitter over "communication with management". He tried to spin it positively, but he did say that "you don't treat a 12-year player like a 2-year player". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 and he didn't retire - for which I am very glad but never expected for several reasons, including the one RPS gave - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 and he didn't retire - for which I am very glad but never expected for several reasons, including the one RPS gave - after the way his ex has acted it would be funny as hell if frank pulled a curtis enis and retired then went to work for 6 bucks an hour..then call up his ex..oops baby..the gravy train's over Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 The possibility is VERY large that Frank will say something, the press will misquote or misinterpret it, and Frank will throw a hissyfit. Well this time there was no misquoting or misinterpreting to it. He said it all on camera in front of the world. Frank just doesn't get it. He is never wrong and nothing is ever his fault. The guy's a damned cancer and the Sox will be much better without him. I'll be glad the day he is gone, but for now Frank, just shut up and hit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 The possibility is VERY large that Frank will say something, the press will misquote or misinterpret it, and Frank will throw a hissyfit. Well this time there was no misquoting or misinterpreting to it. He said it all on camera in front of the world. Frank just doesn't get it. He is never wrong and nothing is ever his fault. The guy's a damned cancer and the Sox will be much better without him. I'll be glad the day he is gone, but for now Frank, just shut up and hit! As long as he shuts up and plays I'm happy. Franks a better guy than the media makes him out to be and so is Bonds. Neither of the two are jerks when they are off the field and they may not be team guys, but they ain't taking drugs and they aren't beating women and all that stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 Well this time there was no misquoting or misinterpreting to it. He said it all on camera in front of the world. Hudler, my man, you underestimate the misinterpretation skills of the Chicago media! They are MASTERS at singling out one quote or one line of an interview and telling everyone what someone "was REALLY saying". Just watch - Frank's interview will be dissected and scoured for hidden meanings and out-of-context connections with other things. That said, Frank has been around a LONG time, and has never learned how to play the media here, so he really should just stop trying to. He should concentrate on the game and the team. He'd be better off if he did, but I'm wondering if he's talking again because the writers vote for the Hall Of Fame? I hope he's not thinking about that, but he does seem ( again, only from what I've read and seen ) to be very concerned about his legacy, and the Hall Of Fame was once a lock but maybe, in his mind, it no longer is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 Hudler, my man, you underestimate the misinterpretation skills of the Chicago media! You're living in a dream world if you think all of this was brought on by the Chicago media. He had a press conference for any and all media. Frank is a selfish person and a crybaby. When he is hitting well, he is happy and everyone can deal with him. But when he is struggling, he is as big a cancer as anyone. He is a classic example of someone who never takes responsibility for his own actions. Too bad the Sox can't trade him for a bag of BP balls and learn to succeed without him, which they will in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 On this we disagree totally. Of course the Sox will one day be without Frank - do you think none of us are aware of mortality or the passing of time? As it is we played without him for most of 2001. Frank can carry this team like no one that I ever seen. Frank was responsible for much of 2000 as any single player on a 25 player team possibly could be. I do not look forward to the day when Frank is gone, which I really hope is after many more years in a WS uniform, retiring as a Sox player. For your trading proposal, I am very grateful that KW and not you is the GM. In fact there is no one out there that I would trade Frank for. Loyalty is a two way street and Frank has a lot of good years left in him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 well wether you love frank or hate him.. hes ours for at least the remainder of this year......sooooooo, if he would just shut the hell up and hit the ball like were used to him doing then this media thing will all be water under the bridge........baggs lol your right he should cut the ex hussys fund train off.......let clayton put on the conductors hat for a change huh.......lol..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted February 23, 2003 Share Posted February 23, 2003 these same thing were said about ted williams and joe dimaggio..hell look at babe ruth and all the crap that surrounded him...he gehrig went like 4 years w/o saying a word to each other... frank is no different then most superstars.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 frank is no different then most superstars.. Frank is a lot different than most other superstars, both in attitude and in the fact that he no longer is one. The guy can hit, that's it. Can't run, can't field, certainly can't slide. He is completely one-dimensional. That is WHEN he hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... HSC...Griffey hit 40 homers a year after his departure from Seattle, got hurt, and hasn't played fulltime since. However, ARod hit .318 52 135 with 18 SBs in 2001 and hit .300 57 142 with 9 SBs this past year....those are some pretty good stats. Not worth $25 mill a year....but maybe $15 mill....especially considering he is a SS that plays rock solid defense(280 put outs, 452 assists, 118 DPs turned and 18 errors in 01; 259 put outs, 472 assists, 108 DPs turned and 10 errors in 02). Arod just has very little around him in Texas(which IS partly due to his huge salary). That's the big reason why Texas has been unsuccessful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... HSC...Griffey hit 40 homers a year after his departure from Seattle, got hurt, and hasn't played fulltime since. However, ARod hit .318 52 135 with 18 SBs in 2001 and hit .300 57 142 with 9 SBs this past year....those are some pretty good stats. Not worth $25 mill a year....but maybe $15 mill....especially considering he is a SS that plays rock solid defense(280 put outs, 452 assists, 118 DPs turned and 18 errors in 01; 259 put outs, 472 assists, 108 DPs turned and 10 errors in 02). Arod just has very little around him in Texas(which IS partly due to his huge salary). That's the big reason why Texas has been unsuccessful I know what the comment HSC made was, but the point was not how well Griffey and ARod did after they left Seattle, but how Seattle got better each year after losing one of their stars. They lost arguably the best OF in the game (at the time) and did better the next year. They lose ARod, agruably the best player in the game period, and won 116 games! That my friend, is addition by subtraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... HSC...Griffey hit 40 homers a year after his departure from Seattle, got hurt, and hasn't played fulltime since. However, ARod hit .318 52 135 with 18 SBs in 2001 and hit .300 57 142 with 9 SBs this past year....those are some pretty good stats. Not worth $25 mill a year....but maybe $15 mill....especially considering he is a SS that plays rock solid defense(280 put outs, 452 assists, 118 DPs turned and 18 errors in 01; 259 put outs, 472 assists, 108 DPs turned and 10 errors in 02). Arod just has very little around him in Texas(which IS partly due to his huge salary). That's the big reason why Texas has been unsuccessful I know what the comment HSC made was, but the point was not how well Griffey and ARod did after they left Seattle, but how Seattle got better each year after losing one of their stars. They lost arguably the best OF in the game (at the time) and did better the next year. They lose ARod, agruably the best player in the game period, and won 116 games! That my friend, is addition by subtraction. I got a feeling that Seattle may be one of the few teams that will be able to get away with that. They got so much better because they had people in the system that could replace them and they actually paid off. They also made quite a few trades as well as spent money. They lost Arod and brought in Ichiro and Carlos Guillen was a very good shortstop prospect. When they lost Griffey they replaced him with Cameron. The big reason they ended up overcoming these losses is they had new players step in. Cameron isn't Griffey, but he was solid. The key was they had a deep deep pitching staff. The Sox could afford to lose Thomas, but they would die without Buerhle and Colon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 So every tram should get rid of a star and they will automatically improve? I can thiunk of a lot of teams that did not happen to. It worked for Seattle in a two year time span but if this were such a great theory, why not have every MLB team try it? I have posted something very similar to this elsewhere but I am tired of the trashing on Frank so here goes: all the stuff about Frank Thomas: A. he was part of the wonderful chemistry 2000 team wasn't he so if he were such a bad team mate how did that team have great chemistry while Frank was having an MVP-typer year? B. Frank was a part of 3 division champion teams: 1993, 1994, and 2000. Not only must he not be wrecking chemistry on three division champion teams, to say the very least, but I request anyone out there to name me one other White Sox player in our entire history who played on 3 separate championship (of any type) White Sox teams. Name one, anybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_SSAC Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 Grrrrr When will that boy grow up? - Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 24, 2003 Share Posted February 24, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... HSC...Griffey hit 40 homers a year after his departure from Seattle, got hurt, and hasn't played fulltime since. However, ARod hit .318 52 135 with 18 SBs in 2001 and hit .300 57 142 with 9 SBs this past year....those are some pretty good stats. Not worth $25 mill a year....but maybe $15 mill....especially considering he is a SS that plays rock solid defense(280 put outs, 452 assists, 118 DPs turned and 18 errors in 01; 259 put outs, 472 assists, 108 DPs turned and 10 errors in 02). Arod just has very little around him in Texas(which IS partly due to his huge salary). That's the big reason why Texas has been unsuccessful I know what the comment HSC made was, but the point was not how well Griffey and ARod did after they left Seattle, but how Seattle got better each year after losing one of their stars. They lost arguably the best OF in the game (at the time) and did better the next year. They lose ARod, agruably the best player in the game period, and won 116 games! That my friend, is addition by subtraction. A big reason the Mariners won in those years was NOT because they got rid of Griffey and then not resigning ARod....a big reason they won is because of what happened and because of the great moves Pat Gillick made. He got Mike Cameron, Brett Tomko....and a few others that I'm not thinking of in the Griffey trade....since then, Tomko has been traded to San Diego and the Mariners got a good backup catcher in Ben Davis and Mike Cameron has turned into a 25-25 guy that plays gold glove defense with a good arm....they also won the bidding of Ichiro, a player no one had ever seen prior to his entrance into the MLB....he surprised everyone and hit like .350 or .360 with 50 SBs, great defense and an incredible arm in the outfield....he was a major reason why the Mariners won in 2001. They also got great numbers from Bret Boone....who to that point in his career was like a .250 15 60 a guy year with pretty good defense....in 2001, he hit .325 37 135 or something to the extent....career year? I think so. In the rotation.....Garcia had a great year...Moyer had a great year...Sele had a great year....Abbott had a pretty good year....and I believe it was Halama who also had a pretty solid year....and then their bullpen was among the best in the league. Not only this, but they had many lucky breaks(though that season is highlighted by something very unlucky....blowing a 12-run lead to Cleveland and then losing the game 15-14). Their bench was also among the best in the league, being both deep and very good. When you mix all that together....a ton of career years offensively plus a great rotation plus a great bullpen plus a good and deep bench plus magic....you will usually win atleast 90 games....and if all 5 are very good....you will win more than that even(like 26 more to be exact...in the M's case anyways). I think it was more a lot of things falling in place the way they should rather than addition by subtraction. You don't think they would have won 116 games with a healthy Griffey Jr and ARod in the lineup and at their respective positions instead of having Cameron in CF and Guillen at SS? I think they would have won 120-125 games....and spent about $20-$30 million more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted February 25, 2003 Share Posted February 25, 2003 We'll have to agree to disagree. Frank is a cancer and is completely selfish. The Sox would be better off without him. It's called addition by subtraction! Ask the Mariners if it works. lol yea it worked for them.. look at what guys like griff and pay rod have done since their departure.........absoultely nothing.........lol..........addition by subtraction always works out well......... HSC...Griffey hit 40 homers a year after his departure from Seattle, got hurt, and hasn't played fulltime since. However, ARod hit .318 52 135 with 18 SBs in 2001 and hit .300 57 142 with 9 SBs this past year....those are some pretty good stats. Not worth $25 mill a year....but maybe $15 mill....especially considering he is a SS that plays rock solid defense(280 put outs, 452 assists, 118 DPs turned and 18 errors in 01; 259 put outs, 472 assists, 108 DPs turned and 10 errors in 02). Arod just has very little around him in Texas(which IS partly due to his huge salary). That's the big reason why Texas has been unsuccessful I know what the comment HSC made was, but the point was not how well Griffey and ARod did after they left Seattle, but how Seattle got better each year after losing one of their stars. They lost arguably the best OF in the game (at the time) and did better the next year. They lose ARod, agruably the best player in the game period, and won 116 games! That my friend, is addition by subtraction. A big reason the Mariners won in those years was NOT because they got rid of Griffey and then not resigning ARod....a big reason they won is because of what happened and because of the great moves Pat Gillick made. He got Mike Cameron, Brett Tomko....and a few others that I'm not thinking of in the Griffey trade....since then, Tomko has been traded to San Diego and the Mariners got a good backup catcher in Ben Davis and Mike Cameron has turned into a 25-25 guy that plays gold glove defense with a good arm....they also won the bidding of Ichiro, a player no one had ever seen prior to his entrance into the MLB....he surprised everyone and hit like .350 or .360 with 50 SBs, great defense and an incredible arm in the outfield....he was a major reason why the Mariners won in 2001. They also got great numbers from Bret Boone....who to that point in his career was like a .250 15 60 a guy year with pretty good defense....in 2001, he hit .325 37 135 or something to the extent....career year? I think so. In the rotation.....Garcia had a great year...Moyer had a great year...Sele had a great year....Abbott had a pretty good year....and I believe it was Halama who also had a pretty solid year....and then their bullpen was among the best in the league. Not only this, but they had many lucky breaks(though that season is highlighted by something very unlucky....blowing a 12-run lead to Cleveland and then losing the game 15-14). Their bench was also among the best in the league, being both deep and very good. When you mix all that together....a ton of career years offensively plus a great rotation plus a great bullpen plus a good and deep bench plus magic....you will usually win atleast 90 games....and if all 5 are very good....you will win more than that even(like 26 more to be exact...in the M's case anyways). I think it was more a lot of things falling in place the way they should rather than addition by subtraction. You don't think they would have won 116 games with a healthy Griffey Jr and ARod in the lineup and at their respective positions instead of having Cameron in CF and Guillen at SS? I think they would have won 120-125 games....and spent about $20-$30 million more. You're missing the point again, so I will assume that I am not making it clear. Never did I mean by "addition by subtraction" that the M's were better because they got rid of those guys (although it is possible) but merely that you can win with a team that comes together without a true star. It means less distractions and more focus on baseball and team. The M's were good with Griffey and ARod, but they got better after they left. I believe in Frank's case that very thing would happen. You would have more guys come together playing for one goal without all the distractions and I think you would see improvement in some guys. It is not an exact science, but I truly believe there is some merit to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted February 25, 2003 Share Posted February 25, 2003 you understood what i meant right???? im lost here since everyone took the liberty of adding one post to another and now im all confused....lol....who do i yell at first..........lol....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 25, 2003 Share Posted February 25, 2003 Rex....I understand that. All I was saying that it is not true in those instances....a good addition by subtraction is the Rangers getting rid of Clayton in the 2001 offseason, or a good addition by subtraction for us was also getting rid of Clayton. We get better by getting rid of him....adding wins while subtracting players. Addition by subtraction. That's how I view addition by subtraction anyways. I see the Mariners situation as damn lucky....not addition by subtraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.