Double Standard

Such a narrow view of the situation causes such radical thinking. Given even recent historical perspective, Ozzie & KW have achieved, whilst the Cubs have not. To lump them all together is to ignore the track record.

A year ago, I though Konerko was washed up and ready to ride him out of town. I'm glad to be wrong and glad the KW and Ozzie can see what I can't. I don't think the same is true on the north side. While the Sox continue to pick up productive and contributory players, the Cubs pick up unproductive and subtractive players.

Hendry stinks to high heaven. Lou's hands are tied until JH is gone. Milton can't handle anything about playing in a big market. Soriano can't get it done. Ramirez is hurt a lot and is not a factor. The cajuns and Soto are back to normal. Z is a nutcase. Marmol is a project, kinda the pitching version of Soriano. Gregg stinks. All this when there are only 2 outstanding NL teams and a plethora of terrible ones.

Kenny Williams is as good as it gets. Ozzie is a World Series manager like Lou but has a good relationship with his GM. Konerko is fading. Pierzynski is a very special player. Getz and Beckham seem to be the future. Ramirez has regressed but his upside is unlimited. Quentin is all around better than most MLB outfielders albeit with an injury bugaboo. Dye is hot and cold but solid overall. Rios is another unlimited upside guy. Danks and Floyd will be around a long time. Jenks is steady. Linebrink has really hurt and helped this team...kinda like Konerko.

But the most important difference and good reason for a double standard is the AL.

Only 3 or 4 bad teams in the league. 8 or 10 contenders. This alone makes it a completely different situation and much more difficult for the Sox. Imo, the cubs would be 10+ under .500 in the AL and the Sox would be 15+ over in the NL.

I guess your dirty sox don't stink either? The Cubs have made a few moves that killed them.

The sox are depending on a lot of guys who don't have a track record and a few that are over the hill. Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Ramirez, Getz are all guys who haven't proven a thing yet. And what about having a AA player in CF for most of the year? One year from Quentin (career average .250) proved nothing. Thornton is the only bullpen guy who is dependable. No doubt Beckham is good, how good no one knows. Got lucky with Pods so far but that is not the answer.

Kenny just didn't do what he needed to do for the sox to get better. The overpaid Rios and very expensive Peavy aquisistions may well set the sox back 2-4 years after this thing blows up. How many positions does anyone see as being set with that team?

Dye (a favorite of mine) and Konerko (never really a special player) and Thome are pretty much done. Look for 2-4 years before either of these teams come around.

I'm not quite sure why every thinks KW is so great. He won a WS so everyone things he's the greatest thing since chocolate milk. What is happening this year? What is the payroll & what is their record? Maybe I am missing something but they don't look much like contenders to me.

Maybe I am just mad because I had to pay $23 for parking!

.

$23..ouch!

Take a few swigs of this nc...




...and the pain will go away!




.

quote:

Originally posted by FastballDad:
Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Ramirez, Getz are all guys who haven't proven a thing yet.

I guess we have different criteria by which to judge, "nothing". But I'll defer to you in that arena, since as a Cubs fan, you may be overqualified as an expert, in nothing.

The phrase, "knee jerk reflex", jumps to mind with your reflecting on the Sox.

CPLZ, no need to get personal. Does being a WS fan give you some right to pass judgement on another's baseball acumen?

I'll say that there are few members of this site who know more about the game than FBD, yourself included.

Rosy,
Since I was directly responding to a quote made by a person, it would have to be personal.

Why do you think it out of bounds to comment on a persons statement or basis for that statement? Being smart does equate to being right. George W. Bush is smart, Dick Cheney is smart...etc.

I believe the comparison between the Cubs continual lack of success and underachieving to the Sox who have ridden more of a roller coaster and actually over achieved in a number of years, to be folly. It is to ignore the chemistry and makeup of both organizations and the basic tenets and philosophies that guide each.

FBD has chosen to take less than one season and extrapolate broad conclusions. It's a flawed model for measurement. He proposed it, I disagree with it, although it's personal, it's hardly disrespectful. And really, my last post was a bit of a good natured poke in the ribs, something I thought FBD might grin at and respond in kind...I have thick skin and healthy sense of humor...I can take it, and although I won't speak for anyone else, I wouldn't do it if I didn't think they could either.

No problem.

Ahhhhh

Nothing like the Sox vs Cubs to make things interesting here.

Who remembers Dave Nicholson?

What would we do if we didn't have this?

Thanks Rosy...you can speak for me just about any time. CPLZ....I was a bit taken back by your attitude but I thought about about it and realized your response was probably based upon the fact I have made a heck of a lot more sense than you have on this board over the years, especially since you have become our fearless leader. You know the expression: "Power corrupts." You kind of remind me of the uncle who for the most part is pretty cool, but he has this thing about being a Confederate Sympathizer in his background. You seem way too smart to be a sox fan.

So, in light of your obvious resentment I can understand where you are coming from. The idea that with THE SINGLE EXCEPTION of 2005 the sox have done any better than the Cubs over the years is just wrong. The results are actually very parallel. My point is simple and perhaps that is why you can't grasp it: the sox are every bit the underachievers the cubs are.....same city, same market, a money-making stadium provided by taxpayers, and last but not least led by a group that needs to be replaced. And CPLZ, as a Cub fan I am very much an expert on observing an underachieving team....which the sox clearly are.

Sorry I gotta go....my ribs are sore.

As an avid (and currently disgusted) Cubs fan, I have a dog in this fight, and I demand to be heard. I can't let CPLZ continue throwing untruths out there unchecked, just because he currently wears the crown. So, Chip, I demand that you retract a statement that you included in your last post, one so far from the truth that it defies all areas of logic. Whoever said George W Bush was smart?

The single exception of 2005 IS WHAT IT IS ALL ABOUT! Once you win the title, then you haven't gone 101 years with out one. People just want to see their team win once in their lifetime. That is what the Boston fans wanted, and got twice. That is what the Sox fans wanted, and got. The Cubs......

Gotwood-

Yes, $23 for "White Sox Parking." $5.00 was "city tax." I just about broke my rims hitting all the potholes as I made my way to I-55.

When I was in Phoenix in June I paid $8 and was actually closer to the park. Not to mention, my rims were never in danger!

Parking will probably be higher next year, since they will need to pay for Peavy and Rios. Maybe our record will above .500 too.

Thanks for the chocolate milk!

To paraphrase Charlie Daniels...
Be proud to the rebel, because the south sides gonna do it again.

quote:

Originally posted by nc42dad:
Maybe I am just mad because I had to pay $23 for parking!

Enjoy yourself while tail-gating for a couple hours.

"Way to smart to be a Sox fan"

"The single exception of 2005"

OK smarty pants....Look up the record of the city series...if you can find it...cub fans would be horrified to know that this Chicago Classic, played every year in the 20's and 30's was way bigger than the World Series to Chicagoans and is the REASON for our special rivalry as compared to NY and LA.

Add 1906 and 2005 to the fact that the White Sox owned the cubs in the City Series and any objective observer would agree that those 3 facts give the Sox a very decided edge.

Soxnole, maybe you are also too smart to be a sox fan...it's just that you let your emotions take charge on this issue.

If we are talking about 1906, why aren't we including 1907 1nd 1908? I know they beat the Cubs in '06 even though everyone knew the Cubs were the better team (why else do you make such a big deal of it?) So since 1907, they have both won 2...so what? In the city series that really does matter...yes the one that they now have....it is what.... a .500 proposition? As far as 2005 goes, yes even a blind dog finds a bone now and then, and that's all it was. There was no great design behind it, it was just good fortune, kharma, whatever you want to believe.

It seems that in the court of public opinion, one team does have a decided edge. After all, why do the Cubs, with their inferior park, etc., etc. etc. continue to outdraw those fabulous sox? Seems like more Chicagoans give The Cubs the edge.

Like I said, we don't have a very good history on either side of town and that history is haunting us all this season.

It's kind of like arguing over who has the better Yugo.

Let's just flat out admit it, trying to put a positive spin on either the Sox or the Cubs this year is kind of like trying to polish a turd!!

turd polishing
The act of trying to make something hopelessly weak and unattractive appear strong and appealing. An impossible process that usually results in a larger, uglier turd

very well put

quote:

Originally posted by FastballDad:
The idea that with THE SINGLE EXCEPTION of 2005 ...

So, besides that single exception Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

huh? yes the single, not-by-design, stars falling into alignment, lucky year of 2005. 0 for 100 is really bad and so is 1 for 100.....thats the point.

I've got to say as a big fan of Lincoln, there is a world of difference between a frivilous argument over the Cubs/sox and the killing of maybe our greatest leader.

I've got a feeling you may just fly those stars and bars over there in LZ.

quote:

Originally posted by FastballDad:
huh? yes the single, not-by-design, stars falling into alignment, lucky year of 2005.

Yes, I believe that trumps the single, not by design, stars never falling into alignment, unlucky century plus of the Cubs.

So, by your analytical model, the BoSox are another failed franchise since their history only has 2 championships in the same timeframe. How far back do we go to answer the simple question, have you won it all in modern history?

Your argument sounds like a policy statement from an office that has a hammer and sickle flag flying over it.

you are right. the sox are a the model franchise for all to follow.

Hammer and sickle? Nope, I am pointing out they both stink. Your calling the sox a success is more like the kremlin patting itself on the back for its' own economic prowess.

You are a funny guy. Anyway enough with this nonsense.... change is in the wind, and it's time to move on.

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

Crown me.

In the land of the cub fan any "W" will do.

They are just so hard to find unless their playing Pittsburgh or Washington...OOPS..make that Pittsburgh.

or the sox

That FB, is Historic Heresy!

LOL I'm so disgusted with The Cubs, I'm not inclined to disagree.

Let's just hope the new owners have the sense to get rid of Hendry and the guts to eat some salary, either let them sit or release them.

FBD, you're conundrum is very much like the markets. When the last long throws up his hands and pleads "just get me out, I can't stand it any longer", you can bet that you've reached a bottom.

Traders would be getting long the Cubbies right now!

Rosy, you are probably right. Only thing is I'm not sure this rocket is gonna launch real soon, so I still have time to buy.


I'm wondering if I might come over with my laptop and look over your shoulder while you trade.....with your wisdom, I'm sure to make a ton.

Hope things are good for You and Jordan.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FastballDad:
Rosy, you are probably right. Only thing is I'm not sure this rocket is gonna launch real soon, so I still have time to buy.

You're 100% on the money. While I'd love to see a quick bounce to the upside, our team could just languish for a while.

Soxnole, you must be loving this.

.



.

rosy.....

Let me just say that "I do not feel your pain"!!!!

heh heh heh!

How could you? You've got enough to deal with that band of raggamuffins on the Southside!

Don't know if this trivia should be here, but didn't want to open a new thread.

Subject: MLB attendance in 2009. Cubs rank 6th in home attendance playing to a MLB second place with 97.2% of capacity and 39,983. Only the Phillies, playing this year in front of a dizzy 102.0% of capacity draw more!Remarkable. On the road, Cubs playing in front of an MLB best of 79.1% of capacity. Put it all together and the 2009 Cubs play in front of an MLB best of 87.8% of capacity. Cubs are followed by Boston and NY Yanks.

Mr.Ricketts, you've got a real prize in your pocket. Use it wisely.

.





Hmmm?

What is inside?

I know! I know!

An outfielder who can count to three!

.

Once again,the flubs are hot...........when it DOESN"T count!

My big issue with both teams (and I am a Sox fan) is the lack of hustle at times. The Cubs lead the majors in standing and admiring balls that come up short and hit the wall , many times being held to a single. I hate that primodonna attitude. And that goes on the manager and management. I was at a Sox game where with 2 outs in the 9th Alexi Ramirez hits a routine fly ball to left which the guy drops and he's standing on first base. At least Ozzie pulled his rear end out of the game immediately. And people wonder why Pierzinski got in Ramirez's face in the dugout. He's a 2nd year player and already pulling that ****. Honestly guys, I'd much rather watch college and minor league baseball then sell my soul to watch guys collect a paycheck. I apologize for the negativity.