Tanaka will be posted

[chibears55]

yes the 2005 were a very good team but there no secret that a couple controversial calls (luck) during the playoffs helped them get to the world series.. but like I said..congrats to them for winning..
so, all those statistics aside they needed some calls / luck to get there and win it..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

 

[Jntg4]

yes the 2005 were a very good team but there no secret that a couple controversial calls (luck) during the playoffs helped them get to the world series.. but like I said..congrats to them for winning..
so, all those statistics aside they needed some calls / luck to get there and win it..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

No teams win it all without a bit of luck. Even the 2013 Blackhawks... what if the season had started earlier? Or later? (Or not been played at all?) Would they have won after a 82-game season? What if Frolik did not get awarded a penalty shot against Detroit? What if Shaw did not score the triple-OT double deflection goal? There are always several things that just happen that just as - if not more - easily could have not happened at all.

 

[chibears55]

No teams win it all without a bit of luck. Even the 2013 Blackhawks... what if the season had started earlier? Or later? (Or not been played at all?) Would they have won after a 82-game season? What if Frolik did not get awarded a penalty shot against Detroit? What if Shaw did not score the triple-OT double deflection goal? There are always several things that just happen that just as - if not more - easily could have not happened at all.

I agree.. I didnt say they didnt deserve to win or were a bad team that won. my origional post to the one poster was mainly to show that both teams history is bad and despite them having a very good year it took some luck / bad calls to help them win a title.
that isnt something new that I just made up or a jab at them..I said they won and congrats.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

 

[brett05]

yes the 2005 were a very good team but there no secret that a couple controversial calls (luck) during the playoffs helped them get to the world series.. but like I said..congrats to them for winning..
so, all those statistics aside they needed some calls / luck to get there and win it..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

Care to quote specifics? I mean they were 11-1. Right now you are coming off as sour apples.

 

[chibears55]

Care to quote specifics? I mean they were 11-1. Right now you are coming off as sour apples.

no sour apples.. parents were sox fans , so glad they won for them....

•Game 2, ALCS: Home-plate umpire Doug Eddings rules Los Angeles Angels catcher Josh Paul failed to catch strike three to A.J. Pierzynski, enabling Pierzynski to reach base with two outs in the bottom of the ninth inning. Joe Crede hits an RBI double to give the Chicago White Sox the victory

Game 4, ALCS: Home-plate umpire Ron Kulpa fails to detect catcher's interference on Pierzynski, and Angels center fielder Steve Finley hits into a key double play in Chicago's win.

Game 2, World Series: Home-plate umpire Jeff Nelson fails to see a two-out, full-count pitch hit Jermaine Dye's bat, ruling that Dye was hit by the pitch. On the next pitch, Paul Konerko hits a go-ahead, seventh-inning grand slam

 

[brett05]

no sour apples.. parents were sox fans , so glad they won for them....

•Game 2, ALCS: Home-plate umpire Doug Eddings rules Los Angeles Angels catcher Josh Paul failed to catch strike three to A.J. Pierzynski, enabling Pierzynski to reach base with two outs in the bottom of the ninth inning. Joe Crede hits an RBI double to give the Chicago White Sox the victory

Game 4, ALCS: Home-plate umpire Ron Kulpa fails to detect catcher's interference on Pierzynski, and Angels center fielder Steve Finley hits into a key double play in Chicago's win.

Game 2, World Series: Home-plate umpire Jeff Nelson fails to see a two-out, full-count pitch hit Jermaine Dye's bat, ruling that Dye was hit by the pitch. On the next pitch, Paul Konerko hits a go-ahead, seventh-inning grand slam

1) thx
2) aj did the right thing Paul messed up
3) could have gone either way w Finley and you don't know what happens next
4) if called foul you don't know what happens with Dye
5) you admit all teams get breaks
6) by mentioning luck you come across as sour apples. Insteae you should be calling them one if the top five or so WS champions based on that team's dominance.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[SilenceS]

1) thx
2) aj did the right thing Paul messed up
3) could have gone either way w Finley and you don't know what happens next
4) if called foul you don't know what happens with Dye
5) you admit all teams get breaks
6) by mentioning luck you come across as sour apples. Insteae you should be calling them one if the top five or so WS champions based on that team's dominance.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

You think that team was top 5 team of all time?

 

[chibears55]

1) thx
2) aj did the right thing Paul messed up
3) could have gone either way w Finley and you don't know what happens next
4) if called foul you don't know what happens with Dye
5) you admit all teams get breaks
6) by mentioning luck you come across as sour apples. Insteae you should be calling them one if the top five or so WS champions based on that team's dominance.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

1.. YW

2.. he first started walking towards the dugout then he chose to run to first.. so, the umps messed up twice on that play as he also should of been called out for heading back to the dugout.

3.. If the correct call was made on Finley then he would not of hit onto a DP, he would of been on 1B.. so, no it could not of gone either way. what happens next is they have a couple men on base and the next batter hits.

4.. no you don't, but you do know it wasn't correctly called and the next pitch was hit for a GS.. different pressure on a pitcher with bases loaded , pissed by a missed call, and then having to face a hot konerko..

5.. yes

6. don't know about top 5 WS team, fact I don't even think theyd crack the top 10 list..

 

[brett05]

You think that team was top 5 team of all time?

Playoff wise yes. The "experts" put them in the top three iirc

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[Jntg4]

You think that team was top 5 team of all time?

Maybe a Top 5 postseason run? :shrug:

 

[brett05]

1.. YW

2.. he first started walking towards the dugout then he chose to run to first.. so, the umps messed up twice on that play as he also should of been called out for heading back to the dugout.

3.. If the correct call was made on Finley then he would not of hit onto a DP, he would of been on 1B.. so, no it could not of gone either way. what happens next is they have a couple men on base and the next batter hits.

4.. no you don't, but you do know it wasn't correctly called and the next pitch was hit for a GS.. different pressure on a pitcher with bases loaded , pissed by a missed call, and then having to face a hot konerko..

5.. yes

6. don't know about top 5 WS team, fact I don't even think theyd crack the top 10 list..

2) he takes a step or two from the inside of the plate and shows the national audience why he's the smartest living ball player

3) we don't know the correct call wasn't made and we have no idea if the Sox still wouldn't have gotten out of the inning

4) the call was missed. It happens as You admit to everyone

6) see my above response. Anyone having them not ranked in the top few for playoff teams is just hating

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[brett05]

Maybe a Top 5 postseason run? :shrug:

Certainly not a top five season. Maybe not a top 50 season

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[Capt. Serious]

Top to bottom, they were one of the best fundamental teams i've ever seen.

But I actually watched them & not talk outta my ass chibears55.

 

[chibears55]

Top to bottom, they were one of the best fundamental teams i've ever seen.

But I actually watched them & not talk outta my ass chibears55.

I watched them too.. theres nothing ive said that hasnt been written or talked about by baseball writers, etc. already. .

 

[brett05]

I watched them too.. theres nothing ive said that hasnt been written or talked about by baseball writers, etc. already. .

No one said they were lucky or not a top fiveish playoff team

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

No one said they were lucky or not a top fiveish playoff team

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

Im sure some said they got lucky with those calls, most called it controversial. .

you originally said a top 5 world series team, which I disagreed with.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

 

[brett05]

Im sure some said they got lucky with those calls, most called it controversial. .

you originally said a top 5 world series team, which I disagreed with.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I437 using Tapatalk

1) show the ones that said they lucked into a championship

2) no I didn't. See post #44

3) for someome that claims they aren't hating from bitterness you sure do a great job hiding that

Back to the thread. I think the Cubs need to go 23+ per year to land Tanaka

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

1) show the ones that said they lucked into a championship

seriously ?? don't have time to look back for articles of writers and such who may have used lucky over controversial for those calls.

2) no I didn't. See post #44

6) by mentioning luck you come across as sour apples. Insteae you should be calling them one if the top five or so WS champions based on that team's dominance.
post 46

3) for someome that claims they aren't hating from bitterness you sure do a great job hiding that

only been responding back to you.. haven't said anything but the fact that they had some lucky/controversial calls go their way.. I never said that 2005 team wasn't a good team or anything..

Back to the thread. I think the Cubs need to go 23+ per year to land Tanaka

good idea.. if it costs that much to land Tanka, if its for more then 4 yrs they should pass.. id be surprise if given more then 5 yrs, if he receives more then 100 mil from teams unless its either front or back loaded or with options..

 

[CSF77]

23 per year seems excessive.

I've heard 105 mil. Then another said 125 mil. Yanks are trying to offer him a contract before the posts go up.

I've said 80 mil is the floor with him. Ceiling I'm seeing is 140 mil on a 7 year deal.

23 mil per is proven ace cash. He is not MLB tested.

So if that is his goal then he should sign a 3 year deal then re hit the market at 28 and then look at ace cash. By then his value should be known.

I believe a140 mil offer would lock him up. Yanks are the biggest competition here. They have to put them into a situation that they are going over 200 mil "this year" and into the tax heavy. Already lost to them on a manager would love to see them get screwed either on beating them or sending them into tax hell for years

 

[TL1961]

Nah, sounds like a certain Japanese outfielder that got signed on the northside years ago.

The Sox are pulling the trigger on moves that make the big league team younger AND better NOW, while freeing up salary.

The Cubs, on the other hand, could care less about the big league club or winning games now. Signing Tanaka would be nothing but a PR move, bound to fail because, well you're the Cubs.

Translated, this post says: "Hi, i'm a lonely little White Sox fan who has nothing better to do than try to rile Cub fans, so I posted this drivel."