Messages

1

Talk Zone / Re: for those Guitar Hero fans (non-bb obv)

« on: January 02, 2008, 06:24:19 pm »

got it a month or so ago and its fun ... the guitars and bass are nothing like guitars and bass they are like Simon says and Tetris ... but still fun ... I mean who thought they would be authentic anyway?

however I think the "drums" are actually pretty instructive ... seriously ...  with a few tweaks to the set up it could be used as an incredible learning tool ... nothing beats the real thing but considering we are talking about a game ... I mean I have played drums for a number of years (granted I am still only mediocre by anyone standards but certainly decent enough to play that and bass regularly live) and with that said I am absolutely certain I left playing that game a better drummer ... it has quieted by kick to a degree and caused me to be more deliberate with it ... plus overall really fun game

2

Talk Zone / Re: Major announcement at 12:30

« on: December 12, 2007, 02:10:02 pm »

Eggszactly.  His defense up the middle is really needed now that AE is gone and perhaps even at shortstop if Miguel moves to third and Wiggington to second out of necessity.  Houston has flexibility in the lineup construction and also on defense now.

I was thinking about that also. I wonder could we see Tejada at 3rd Kaz at short and Wigginton at second. Second might be the only down grade ... who knows - either way your right lots of options and options are a good thing.

3

Talk Zone / Re: Major announcement at 12:30

« on: December 12, 2007, 02:05:50 pm »

I'm not saying that Matsui will wind up on the bench, no way.  He'll start at #2 and they'll go from there.

I didn't think you were. If Kaz is healthy we'll see him at second even if he's not hitting second - no doubt - and its a good thing in light of this trade to defray some of the defense we'll loose up the middle (although I think tejada's lack of D is a bit over exaggerated).

4

Talk Zone / Re: Major announcement at 12:30

« on: December 12, 2007, 01:59:16 pm »

Good point.  Matsui could prove by mid-season to be a #8 hitter and Pence moves up to #2, Wiggington to #6 and Towles to #7.  At least this gives them that opportunity to make such a move if necessary and still keep Matsui's superior defense in play up the middle.

yeah its something i think we might see at some point but hopefully we have a 'hitting kaz'. true ... a plus is its a safety valve of sorts if Kaz reverts to some of his NYC ways.

5

Talk Zone / Re: Major announcement at 12:30

« on: December 12, 2007, 01:56:54 pm »

Opportunity, sure. But Wade already announced his lineup, and Pence wasn't batting 2nd. So there you go.

yeah saw that - which is why I was suprised

6

Talk Zone / Re: Major announcement at 12:30

« on: December 12, 2007, 01:53:57 pm »

I would think with the addition of Tejada that would provide an opportunity to move Pence to 2. Its been beat to death so my apologies but I think pence would not only benifit tremendously but more importantly the team would. I understand Kaz hitting 2 with the previous lineup (I was not a fan of it but I understand their thinking) but with Tejada in the heart of the order I am not sure I see the advantage.  

7

Talk Zone / Re: Your NL MVP

« on: November 21, 2007, 01:47:54 pm »

I'm curious: what 3 others do you think were more qualified than Rollins?

Probably Holliday, Ramírez, Fielder

reasonable minds can differ ... Rollins had a great year

8

Talk Zone / Re: Your NL MVP

« on: November 21, 2007, 01:40:58 pm »

I was hoping nobody would ask.

Good lord if that response bugged you, you may have issues … I didn’t feel the need to go into the specifics on who I thought was the best player in the NL or why … Simply because Rollins wouldn’t have been top 3 on my ballot thats not to say he’s undeserving … I think there are a number of good candidates this season …

9

Talk Zone / Re: Your NL MVP

« on: November 20, 2007, 02:38:09 pm »

wouldn't have been my choice (or in my top 3) but it was a close year ... no run away choice

10

Talk Zone / Re: NL swept again

« on: October 30, 2007, 11:25:20 am »

The NL has been swept in three of the past four World Series (St. Louis, 2004; Houston, 2005; Colorado, 2007) and the AL has dominated the All-Star game for a decade.

What are the reasons for this domination by one league? What will it take to turn it around? Does anyone care?

I was thinking the same thing ... it seems the NL has had a number of teams recently that are able to get through the first rounds and to the series courtesy of a hot streak – only then run into a wall … (sure, its all streaks to some extent in the postseason) but overall I think it makes it more plausible in the NL for (we'll call them) borderline playoff teams to get through because the NL is not near as top heavy as the AL, generally speaking ...

not that these NL teams are bad teams but those three are teams that, in my opinion, overachieved getting to the series ... 

11

Talk Zone / Re: Your 2008 Houston Astros

« on: September 12, 2007, 04:53:39 pm »

The irony may be that if Jennings would accept a one year incentive deal and he's healthy, he could be that inning eater they need at #2.

I am starting to think this may be the best option (assuming his injury isn't a career changer - which could be a big 'if') ... given the lack of pitching on the free agent market Jennings’s ceiling could be as high as any (of course we've seen the basement)...

12

Talk Zone / Re: Choosing a Guitar (Non-BB)

« on: September 05, 2007, 06:05:54 pm »

Not directed specifically at you, though your post sort of spurred my response.  I was simply saying that guitar playing, like anything else, certainly attracts its share of "I'd only do it this way..." crowd, which also has its share of pretentious blowhards (again, not referring to your).  One will hear lots of things from "Fender is your best buy" to "whatever you do, don't buy a Fender".  Advice from anyone on anything should be taken with a grain of salt, and it's best to get as much advice as you can from as many different people as you can.  As for the budget, there are lots of quality guitars on the market, new and used, in the $300-400 range.  One need not settle for a kit in a box, nor should one have to exhaust himself trying to find a used gem.  Lots of opinions, lots of choices out there.  I think more importantly than anything, buy a guitar you're comfortable with, and one you'll want to play. 

Agree on the setup.  It's amazing how much better your guitar will feel when it's set up properly, something that simply cannot be found "out of the box".

I agree with you and the best advice is find what you like and go for it ...

I get what your saying and trust me there is a level of music/gear snobery that bugs the living @#$% out of me - lots of good guitars and basses out there and like i've said a few times my main instrument is a bass I paid 80 dollars for on ebay and it plays fantastic ...

Generally 400 can go a long way - but you may find a hell of a deal at GC, absolutly, no reason not to look ... GC is a great place to go and certainly a good place to start ... I bought a keyboard there 6 months ago new that was priced better with a warrenty than any used 'as is' deal I could find, significantly better ... I know a few guys that work in the GC on westhiemer that will shoot you strait and give dead on advice ... of course I have also been told when browsing the acoustics "hey I'd really like to get you into this ovation over here" ... I couldn't help but laugh and not because I don't care much for ovations ... 

I certainly don't have it in for guitar center ... I am probably going to be there in about an hour buying a bass cab because I want a new one with a warrenty and they are good about handeling that stuff ... very good ... but good guitars don't spoil - I would just suggest to spend a little time looking around ...


.... by the way I just realized my first post sounded like YOU HAVE TO BUY USED ... didn't mean for it to come off like that ... only that I wouldn't be afriad to go that route - I think thats going to be your best bet, but don't let it prevent you from looking around ...

13

Talk Zone / Re: Choosing a Guitar (Non-BB)

« on: September 05, 2007, 04:39:14 pm »

And don't believe what you hear about people who work at music stores...they can often offer great advice if you ask for it.  And there is nothing wrong with buying a guitar at Guitar Center.  It doesn't have to come from the secret underground guitar players club to be a decent guitar.

If it refers to my post … Again I said take the advice with a grain of salt … but I will say I am constantly dumbfounded by some of the “advice” given trying to make a sale … its not always the case but there is a reputation for a reason … if you go in there and know what your talking about sure great advice can be had (because most those guys are good dudes and many are very good musicians) but they are trying to push product like anyone else … nothing wrong with it - just be skeptical … I couldn’t begin to tell you how much crap I’ve bought from guitar center and I am probably going there today but I hear just as much used car talk in that place as anywhere else … I will say there is less of that kind of thing that happens at Rockin Robin and much much less at Fullers (but both of those places are much too pricey -  moreso than guitar center - and don’t have a good stock of inexpensive guitars – so they don’t make sense in this situation) … overall I think guitar center is a great place to look around and do some playing and find what you like but you can find a better deals out there if you look … having a budget of 400 dollars shouldn’t by any means confine someone to playing a “starter” guitar … however if you HAVE to buy new then guitar center has some very good deals but this is why I suggest the used rout …

Anyway I didn’t mean to insinuate anyone needs to buy from a “secret guitar players club” … I bought half my guitars off ebay – I don’t consider it secret- well about as secret as google … my point is doing a little digging and research will get you a better quality guitar you will enjoy playing for many years and for not very much money - buying the guitar in a box special at guitar center almost certainly will not ... in general your dollar won't travel as far there when there are endless used options … and again what ever you do spend the extra 30 bucks and have someone set it up for you - even the nicest guitars play like crap if they are not properly set up …

14

Talk Zone / Re: Choosing a Guitar (Non-BB)

« on: September 05, 2007, 12:07:19 pm »

In my experience there's not a whole lot difference in Fender Americans and Fender Mexicans.  In the grand scheme of things they're probably made by the same exact person just on different sides of the fence.  I'm mainly a bassist and Fender is probably my favorite bass but I do know their guitars are not as impressive as something like a Les Paul or Gretsch.  Also if you want a heavier sounding and more interesting looking guitar, BC Rich makes starter models of their warlock and I think they come in packages as well.  I have a BC Rich Virgo Bass and the craftmanship is quite good.

I agree Fender basses are great - shoot they dominate the bass market ... but the bass market is much less competitive ...

I think fender guitars stand up as well to Gibsons and Gretschs - Fenders are one of the top brands ... well all except for strats - I hate strats (but thats just me lots of folks love them) ... But I always play my Telecaster over any guitar I have (including numerous gibsons) ... it just depends on what kind of sound you want  - tele's cut through MUCH better than less pauls for instance (who have more of a lower growling tone) ... anyway it depends on what you want but I would disagree that fenders aren't as impressive as less pauls or Gretsch or other top brands ...

15

Talk Zone / Re: Choosing a Guitar (Non-BB)

« on: September 05, 2007, 11:52:44 am »

You need to buy used if you want a guitar that is going to last you beyond the beginner stages in your budget – and there are plenty of good options if you spend some time looking (actually buying used is always my advice but you especially given you have some background with music), I don't see any reason to go to guitar center and give them 300 bucks for what ever 'beginner all in one kits' they are pushing off when there are a number of good guitars you can get in the 200-300 dollar range that will play great and fit your needs much longer than any beginner kit in a box. To be honest those kits are fine for kids but you especially with at least some background in music (I am assuming from the violin playing you mentioned) you will want a better playing instrument pretty quick.  … If you get a used guitar take it to a guitar store (preferably a local smaller shop) and have them set it up for you (about 30 bucks) and barring a significant defect in the guitar it will play great and much better than any guitar out of a box ... the only certainty with the guitar out of a box options  is you will want a different guitar in 10 months … and if you go take the sales persons at guitar center with a grain of salt …

Guitar Center isn't a bad place to buy a practice amp or ‘supplies’ (picks straps)... at this point an amp is of little concern. Get a little cheapo practice amp for 60-90 bucks … however like the guitars you can also find some great used options out there … For example …  I have a little practice amp I found on eBay it’s a little Kalamazoo late 60’s tube amp (part of gibson’s attempt at amps) (I paid 60 bucks – nice little tube sound in a little practice amp) and its gets a really nice sound one I’ve used to record with on a couple of occasions (it gets an old raw 60’s type sound).
In fact I did a quick search and here’s an amp just like for cheap … http://cgi.ebay.com/Mid-60s-Kalamazoo-Model-One-amp_W0QQitemZ190148252760QQcmdZViewItem

all that aside I would focus on getting the guitar first - (yo can find great deals if you look - my two primary guitars and basses I paid less that 150 each for) ... As for guitars I would suggest a used fender telecasters, epiphone, ventura (70’s ‘lawsuit” guitars if you can find one) …

There are lots of options out there those are just a few - I would just spend some time looking. 

16

Talk Zone / Re: He may have blown the cubs game...

« on: September 03, 2007, 08:12:29 pm »

prol doubles by a stros rookie

17

Talk Zone / Re: Selig wants the Astros to keep Cooper

« on: August 31, 2007, 06:04:26 pm »

I didn't like the way it sounded when I heard it but I have a sneaking suspicion selig was speaking more as a friend of Cooper/wishing him well (stemming from cooper's playing days in MIL) yet the article makes it seem a little like it was an edict from the commish on high ... having thought about it it seems like harmless encouragement and wishing a former player/friend well ...

18

Talk Zone / Re: my email to a friend today

« on: August 28, 2007, 02:12:50 pm »

His defense was a bigger issue and being worked on primarily.  Folks tend to think Pence came up a huge prospect somehow.  His original status was that of "needs work to become a decent left fielder".  He was never a come right out of the box high ceiling prospect.

I am familiar with Pence as a college player and I remember thinking the stros reached a bit on him when he was drafted ... what the hell do I know …

Either way his sliding isn’t enough of an issue in itself to hold him back once he’s reach AAA - but its something that probably should have been addressed in some form or fashion prior if it was a significant concern … maybe it wasn’t a concern or maybe Pence wasn’t receptive to the adjustment … but I doubt either of those was the case (I don’t believe this is the first time Pence has injured his wrist sliding) … Pence was a project to be sure, but it should have been addressed in the 3 years prior … its not like asking him to completely re invent his swing  …   

19

Talk Zone / Re: what's the big announcement in 30 minutes?

« on: August 28, 2007, 11:35:01 am »

Ironically, that injury you speak of that slowed him down is directly associated to not learning in the minors the proper way to slide and something he could've used more time to develop down there.

If so, as a side note, its probably somehting that should have been touched on before he was 24 and in AAA ...

20

Talk Zone / Re: what's the big announcement in 30 minutes?

« on: August 27, 2007, 05:00:09 pm »

The booing yesterday registered with more than just McLane.   So he's gone for that reason more than the baseball ineptitude that some will try to sell you.  If you believe the ineptitude angle, then good for you.  It's not the entire truth. 

I agree to an extent although, and maybe it was just me, but I picked up on some developmental issues with hitters in Drayton’s comments ... did you catch that ? I wasn't sure if I misheard it or not - something along the lines of 'offensively as an organization from top to bottom' ... maybe it was just me and I could have misheard something as folks where walking in and out of my office ...

21

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 04:19:44 pm »

look, do you agree that a hitter can do everything exactly right and still make an out? do you also agree that another hitter can do everything thing exactly wrong and hit one out? that precisely is why approach and results do not necessarily match up. raw, natural talent also enters in sometimes.

I guess I am confused as to how we could have ended, seemingly, on the opposite sides of the fence on this thread ... I guess I misunderstood you on that point ... thats what I was trying to convey when I (poorly worded) said this:

I don’t necessarily disagree that Lee’s approach is better but I view approach as one of a few factors that affect the overall hitter (full offensive package) …  

… this is not to downplay or overly compartmentalize approach, only that it is one of a few factors - at least in my view - of hitting …

22

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 04:05:03 pm »

R33,

We are talking about what we *see*, not about stats.  Jim quantified that already, damn this is getting old!  Same converstation over and over and all the time we're led back to stats as if we're blind or something and stats will show us the way.  What we see from watching Lee's approach, he is different than Berkman in that he's about making contact.  Contact is hitting.  Without contact, you cannot *hit* a baseball.  Berkman is about swinging... hard... the situation does not dictate his swing, he uses the same approach regardless.  And he's damn good at it.  In fact, he's elite about it.  But he is what he is.  When you read guys talk about hitting... again, *hitting*, it's about what they must do to make contact with a baseball and put it in play.  The outcome of the contact is out of their hands (hence results isn't the issue, it's approach to making contact).  Barry Bonds talks about his approach to hitting and it's fascinating to listen to him too.  Bonds talks about "catching" the ball with his bat.

Approach is something you either understand or you don't.  At this point, you cannot confuse it with stats to prove it otherwise.

hold on ... I wasn't confusing it with stats my point was in response to the assertion that the results from that approach is reflected in stats and that while it may be reflected in certain situations this year it was not reflected in those same situation over the previous seasons ... having watched Carlos Lee for a few years I haven't seen a great shift in his approach between this season and the previous few ... its not a point on his approach its a point on SOME but not all of the results from said approach (as it was brought up by someone else) ... I was just pointing it out ...

23

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 03:58:26 pm »

Because Jim said something and only that reason?  If so, that is not a good enough reason.

It is actually a very bad reason.  Because it's not about having a viable conversation, it's about Jim and only Jim and that is not what this place is about.

I intended to address the topic and I guess I must have missed the prior discussions  ... my visits have lessened in the last couple of years ... but I wasn't trying to get on Jim - well until that last bit of BS he posted but if this has been hashed and rehashed I can understand  ...

24

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 03:52:47 pm »

well, fucky bully for you. now stop.

jesus christ if this shit bugs you so much stop fucking reading ...  

25

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 03:45:52 pm »

That is *all* anyone said (context being everything).  So that should end the discussion, no?

well I disagree Lee is a better hitter ... but specific to approach not necessarily

26

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 03:41:12 pm »

Look at Lee's splits "by situation" for this year.  When he needs a single, his average is way up.  When he needs to get something started, his average way down.  That's his approach being reflected in results.

while lee has been impressive this year in situations (such as scoring position 2 outs) ... the three years prior 04-06 He was terrible in many of those same situations  ... where as Berkman has consistantly been among the best in baseball in situations with runners on / RISP / RISP 2 outs ...

27

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 03:02:18 pm »

I know Lee was hired to drive in runs, but to see him at the top of the league, all year long, with the people in front of him hitting as poorly as they have, is amazing.

well he does have berkman in front of him and for a large part of the season PENCE! ... I wouldn't call that nothing in fact thats pretty darn good ... not to down play his good perfomance but he's had folks on base ...

Much more impressive would be Berkman last season with such poor production out of the leadoff spot and the 2 hitter ...

28

Talk Zone / Re: Lee the hitter

« on: August 27, 2007, 02:03:51 pm »

It’s a little bit of a definition point for me - more than anything …

I don’t necessarily disagree that Lee’s approach is better but I view approach as one of a few factors that affect the overall hitter (full offensive package) … the player with the best approach isn’t, in my opinion, necessarily the best hitter, because of the other factors that contribute to a players offensive make up …

For instance Alou’s approach was great but he wasn’t the offensive player Bagwell was … now his approach might make him better situated for certain in game situations but overall his performance was inferior and in the end the measure of an offensive player is his performance … this is not to downplay or overly compartmentalize approach, only that it is one of a few factors - at least in my view - of hitting … Now I generally like players with an approach like alou’s because I think they tend maintain high levels of more consistent performances over longer periods in not relying as heavily on physical attributes (making them less apt to fall as hard when the physical ability begins to dry up … or minor injury’s occur )

But when measuring an overall hitter at the end of the day it’s a game of results because you put all these factors together and see what you have … so to that end I think its pretty hard to say Bagwell and Berkman aren’t the top 2 hitters in the last 10-15 years … As far as Berkamn and Lee I think Lee is a very good hitter and I think the Alou comparisons are valid (which is why I think he’d be a good 5 hitter) but both Lee and Alou were overall second on their respective teams to better overall offensive players (another reason each didn’t hit 3) … while I might like his approach in certain situations better – in general I’d rather have Berkman at the plate because despite his tendancy to ‘just rip it’ - his eye and power make up (in my opinion) for any deficiency in approach (although at Berkmans level I wouldn’t call it a deficiency in general - just by comparison to a couple of other elite hitters) …

A player can approach an at bat like Ted Williams but if he’s not able to execute as well as players with different, perhaps inferior, approaches then it doesn’t mean much … Lee is a very good hitter but I think he overall falls short of Berkman … However as highly as I think of berkman as a hitter it is his approach (to me) more than anything that keeps him from being as good with a bat as say someone like Pujols …

But that’s my 4 cents – sorry for the length - reasonable minds can differ …

29

Talk Zone / Re: Lee & Berkman

« on: August 24, 2007, 04:25:57 pm »

Berkman is not even close to as good a hitter as Lee is.

This year I think Lee's been better. Over their careers I couldn't disagree more.

30

Talk Zone / Re: Lee & Berkman

« on: August 24, 2007, 10:38:49 am »

it does show how good Bagwell was ... however I don't think Lee and Berkman are as similar as that list indicates ... Lee's numbers come from close to a thousand more at bats ... Berkmans got more power and is a better all around hitter - barring this season Berkman keeps company with Pujols, Manny, Cabrera, etc ... while I think Lee has consistently been a notch below in the second tier of very good bats ...   

31

Talk Zone / Re: Berkman

« on: August 13, 2007, 02:07:00 pm »

what is a "five?" do you think this is a basketball team?

bullshit. there is nothing that requires any certain offensive level from a specific defensive position.

… 5th hitter … I can see the confusion with scorecard numbering however no reason to get pissy …

I didn’t mention any offensive expectations from specific defensive positions (defensively Wigginton has been fine and to be honest a bit better than I expected) … However there are offensive requirements from certain positions in the lineup … and definitely from the fifth hitter which often times is the teams second or 3rd best overall hitter (depending on each teams surplus or shortage of RBI hitters) (the best overall hitter generally hitting 3rd) …

Wigginton is not a solid number 5 and if he is your 5 you are weak in that spot (barring a significant improvement on his part) and, in all likelihood, it means you are weak in the 6th spot as well … obviously as you move down the lineup expectations are lowered but the 5th spot especially, and to a slightly lesser degree 6 need to be at least average (if the expectation is an above average offense)  - 7 and 8 are gravy either way … Wigginton’s average is somewhat border line for a 5 (not bad just border line);  he strikes out a bit much and isn’t a very good RBI man … mix in his mediocre power … and he is in no shape to be a good offensive team’s 5th hitter (generally speaking) – I think he could work as the 6 and on a very good offensive team would likely hit 7 (of course depending on the teams individual makeup - but generally speaking) … so if Wigginton is your 5 it likely reflects a weakness not only at 5 but at 6 …

Now I think Pence ‘could’ fill the role at 5 (if and only if his average stays up above a reasonable level and his K’s are kept in check – that has happened thus far pre injury but he is riding that line of striking out to much for the 5th spot – however his average has been high enough where it wouldn’t be an issue) … however personally I like Pence at 2 and to large extent moving him is robbing peter to pay paul - in that I think you now have some problems at the top of the order …

By the way this doesn’t mean I don’t like Ty I am simply skeptical about our offense if he is at 5 … I think the direction the astros go in right/center (aka the other OF not named Pence or Lee) will answer a lot of questions about what kind of offensive team we are going to have … Hopefully its someone that can fill the role of a 4th or 5th hitter – I say 4 because I think Lee could work at 5 …

32

Talk Zone / Re: Berkman

« on: August 12, 2007, 10:56:04 pm »

I think Wigginton's an upgrade over the prior situation and his approach is certainly refreshing - but if he's your five then you likely still have some offensive issues ...

33

Talk Zone / Re: BBQ Joints (Non-BB)

« on: August 11, 2007, 11:44:08 am »

Wet and dry rubs and mops are fine, in fact necessary, for the preparation. It's whether you have to slather the meat with sauce in order to eat it that's the problem.

Even a good steak can benefit from a little something when being prepared.

have to vs. want to - obviously if you ‘have to’ to cover something thats one thing but I view it as an enhancement to a meat that tastes better than it does on its own - I consider sauce an intricate part of BBQ ... on the other hand i don't like suaces or rubs on steaks because i prefer the natural flavor of the meat (unless of course its a carne asada but that’s along the same principle as bbq being a skirt steak)

at the end of the day what ever tastes good ...

34

Talk Zone / Re: BBQ Joints (Non-BB)

« on: August 10, 2007, 05:12:53 pm »

I get the no sauce thing when eating a steak - and I can't stand any sauce and it being cooked any where above rare+ ... but most BBQ is pretty mediocre to bad cuts of meat and sauce seasonings and rubs are a big part of great BBQ ... if it taste great without, that’s fine but I see no reason to be picky about savoring the natural flavors of those cuts of meat ... but again that’s just me ...

35

Talk Zone / Re: BBQ Joints (Non-BB)

« on: August 09, 2007, 03:54:01 pm »

yeah thelmas and Lulings are my top 2 but its all preference at that point ... by the way someone mentioned wet ribs earlier and I am not sure if thats what you would technically call thelmas ribs but they are awfully heavy on the sauce ... which I don't mind because like wings when I eat ribs I like to look like i've eaten ribs ...

36

Talk Zone / Re: BBQ Joints (Non-BB)

« on: August 09, 2007, 03:18:29 pm »

I've heard with Thelma's you have to be in line by 11:00 or 11:15, otherwise the wait is about an hour. 

some days ... but yeah generally there is a pretty good wait

worth it though ...

37

Talk Zone / Re: BBQ Joints (Non-BB)

« on: August 09, 2007, 03:12:28 pm »

No mention of Thelma's in houston?? ... its the best ... and as a plus its near the ball park ... 

Luling is very good, Pizzatola's is good, ottos is overatted, goode co. is good but also overatted ... I like all these just fine with Luling and Pizzatola's better than ottos and Goode but they all fall short of Thelma's ...

38

Talk Zone / Re: Greek food in Houston (TOTALLY non-bb)

« on: July 29, 2007, 02:12:16 am »

live a few blocks from Niko Niko's - eat there often and its very good ... la fendee around the corner (westheimer and yupon) is just about as good

39

Talk Zone / Re: new music catagory

« on: July 26, 2007, 09:54:32 am »

yeah I hate over fills and over playing (one reason I just can't stand Neil Pert - who is also WAY to mechanical IMO – although he is certainly one of the better drummers in his style I do think he's significantly overatted)… however - over playing and over fills, for one reason or another, work for Moon ...

my personal favorites:
Glen Kotche – (wilco/jim orourke/solo) one of, if not the, most inventive drummer out there … this also mixed with a phenomenal sense of tact …

john blackwell (prince / Patti Labelle / Cameo) - Possibly the best pure r/b, jazz, funk drummer out there … certainly tops in the showman category (if you’ve seen him you know what I am talking about) …

John Bonham – big behind the beat groove … as good a style as anyone ever …

buddy rich – needs to be on any best of list

40

Talk Zone / Re: The "Greatest" Guitarists -- Rock, Funk, Blues, Rhythm & Blues, etc. (non-bb)

« on: July 13, 2007, 02:21:58 pm »

Were there any bad guitarists?

apparently not

41

Talk Zone / Re: Pence now leads NL

« on: July 09, 2007, 02:43:02 pm »

of course, he has done well. as to the "preexisting opinion," i hope you include the RR Express folks along with the opinions of TZers that phrase includes.

you cannot conclude anything from a half season except that he is unconscious right now. good for him. only time will tell how good he turns out to be, and i'll still say, for me, individual stats are BFD if the team is not successful.

of course - although I haven’t spoken with many involved with RR (or corpus) specifically on pence ...

overall I agree with you – it is only a half season and to extrapolate anything is kind of pointless if not outright misleading ... but I do appreciate individual stats when they reflect good performances and often in seasons like this where the games get progressively less meaningful its one of the things baseball has that keeps the games more interesting (subplots) something the other sports fall short in (IMO buts that’s neither here nor there) … I don’t value stats that have little meaning as it relates to winning or are the product of some kind of numerical oddity … 

42

Talk Zone / Re: Pence now leads NL

« on: July 09, 2007, 01:50:10 pm »

if at the end of the season we look back and say "you know what as good of a first half as Pence was having, he was as bad as anyone in the second," then, I guarantee you folks will criticize … I know I will  … however with pence sometimes it seems this massive slump is assumed or dare I say hoped for (perhaps to validate a preexisting opinion – but that’s another bag of worms - I thought he’d struggle significantly more than he has but I am glad I was wrong) …

we’ll see if he keeps it up given last seasons hot/cold performance … but you can only praise a player for what he’s done in context and given it’s the first half of a rookie season: good job ... of course - the obvious - its only been the first half of a seasons so some of the enthusiasm should be tempered … however, I don’t think his performance thus far is worth blowing off with a who cares or big fucking deal … as a long time lurker back to the AC days it seems a little inconsistent with how the praise and criticism of other players has flowed on this board … for now I just assume say good job thus far on a very good performance … no more no less and move on

43

Talk Zone / Re: Pence now leads NL

« on: July 09, 2007, 11:37:37 am »

So leading the league at some arbitrary date is now an accomplishment?

no, but performing at a high level for half a season is ... and performing at a high level for a full season will be an even bigger accomplishment ... this post on May 4th is not a BFD but it becomes progressively noteworthy as the season moves on ... its not about a random stat on a random date - its about a great performance through the first half of a season ... it shouldn’t take the stat to make one notice but if it does who cares - He’s done a good job thus far … and I'll leave it at that ...

I didn't make this original post but I think half a season is worth noting ... this doesn't mean we need to hang a fucking banner next to biggio's 3000 nor does it mean we need to belittle it for whatever reason ... I'd prefer to be happy for the kid and say good job, the same way most did when luke scott finished half a season with a similar performance last year ...

44

Talk Zone / Re: Pence now leads NL

« on: July 09, 2007, 11:02:20 am »

I don’t know if it’s a “BFD” but it’s a pretty nice accomplishment and it will be an even bigger one if he holds on and finishes the year like this …

Obviously the teams record is more important but that’s no reason to ignore or belittle a good individual performance …  It may not be the biggest fucking deal in the world and it would be an even bigger fucking deal after a full season but it is worth noting and I for one would rather be happy for Pence than get caught up in the bullshit negativity on here that seems to surround his success … 

45

Talk Zone / Re: Biggio vs. Yount = HOF

« on: June 29, 2007, 08:21:08 pm »

my personal favortie critique is the 3000 hits "only because he held on so long" or "it took him 20 years to get 3000" ... like its somehting that should be knocked out in 5 years ... WTF ... I would wager a great number of the 3000 club got there in years 19 and 20 ...

of course it took him 20 years its the fucking nature of getting 3000 hits in the majors ... its not like taking 3000 shits ... ... ... which by estimation would take about 8 years ... ... ... well for Mcneal its less and he is one shit closer ... 

46

Talk Zone / Re: Ensberg's slide

« on: June 13, 2007, 05:21:05 pm »

everyone agreed that my Coaches Association card should be confiscated b/c i allowed my players to slide headfirst if they wanted. i'm looking for it.

never had a problem with someone diving into first because - 1) it rarely happened and 2) usually meant the kid was busting his tail down the line ...  plus I always thought it was a tougher call for some umps to make particularly those that rely on the sound of the stomp of the bag ... its not a good "reason to do it" but its a reason enough for me not to mind it ...

47

Talk Zone / Re: Ensberg's slide

« on: June 13, 2007, 05:04:11 pm »

did someone ask you something? did you notice the discussion had moved well past this?

actually I hadn't ... posted before i realized there were multiple pages ...  

48

Talk Zone / Re: Ensberg's slide

« on: June 13, 2007, 02:19:39 pm »

Sliding into first is slower and should rarely if ever be done however it can help to sell a call (although that is a weak reason to do it)

49

Talk Zone / Re: Jennings wants 12 million per?

« on: June 06, 2007, 05:25:08 pm »

Willy > Burke  (the alligator eats the better one right) any way you look at. It's hard to have a discussion with you because you won't take a stance. IF you think Burke is better fine, it's not like we are comparing Willy Mays to Casey Candeale. Willy better starting, better on the bench, faster, better defense. I don't see the evidence for Burke being a better choice.

while Willy is certainly off to a good year - I still think Burke has a higher offensive ceiling and a little bit more versatility long term ... I admit to being very skeptical of all rule 5 guys and never really got on board with Willy (although he did improve his D in center markedly, IMO) ... but I felt offensively he was a perfect example of what some call a hollow batting average ... really reminded me of Alex Sanchez from his Detroit Milwaukee days - high average / weak hit singles / no walks / fast but not the greatest baserunner ... To me, overall Willy was a player who used his one great asset (his speed) to make up for deficiencies in most other areas - it compensated for bad breaks in center / it beat out poorly hit balls / it made him appear a better base runner than he is ... and in the end that’s fine  - however you get it done is great … but thinking long term, to me, this is a dangerous asset to hang your hat on with a player because they can and will loose speed - and usually much earlier than other attributes ... now Willy could improve and he has been off to a good start but if he looses a significant amount of that speed (via injury or age) I think every single area of his makeup as a player suffers significantly because it is so interdependant – this isn’t to say he becomes Glen Barker but he wouldn’t be a starter and even with his speed was tetering on the edge of that …

Therefore as a long term player generally I’d favor Burke if only because of his higher ceiling offensively … but it certainly appears like a very close call at this point given this seasons happenings not to mention I would rather have Willy for the present on this teams bench ... just my two cents ...

50

Talk Zone / Re: Jennings wants 12 million per?

« on: June 06, 2007, 11:28:23 am »

it sounds to me like he might be stirring the pot a little on a player that he doesn’t expect to re - sign or just K posturing …  but whatever that just bs speculation ...


Re: Jennings
I have followed Jennings fairly closely during his career and obviously to look at his career stats is misleading because of coors but even more so, people love to look at home road splits when judging a player in coors and the problem is (in my opinion) pitchers tend  to over throw, tinker and alter their natural mechanics for coors and it affects there road games because of the habits created in coors – its not as simple as altitude / no altitude …

Had Jennings pitched his career in a different park he would, to me, be  viewed among the top number 2’s in the NL and likely be sporting a career era a run lower – so 12 million isn’t unreasonable … health is an issue only because he’s coming back from injury but I don’t recall any significant history with him …

As for the trade I personally don’t think its that bad because I thought many overrated Willy (who, to me, seemed like an Alex Sanchez type player with a bit better D) and Hirsch seems a whole lot more like a Scott Elarton redux than a high ceiling guy (but who knows that remains to be seen is just my perception) … to me it all hinges on resigning Jennings … and if it is a rental then we gave up a little too much but frankly  there isn’t anything we gave up I particularly miss …

51

Talk Zone / Re: Is this a nightmare series for Purp?

« on: June 05, 2007, 12:47:21 pm »

do you folks think Pence can hold down CF for the near future or do you think it is an issue that needs addressing in the off season or sooner ...

Obviously, I don’t think Pence has been good defensively but there has been some improvement and it seems to me he might be able to grow enough into the position for the short term (meaning 2 or 3 years) to become an adequate defender (although I don't think his defensive ceiling is any higher than that) … given the expense and difficulty to get a CF who provides some offense and solid D - and the seemingly much easier task of finding offense in right … do you see Pence in center as a potential solution for a couple of years … until a better CF solution can be developed or signed ...

52

Talk Zone / Re: Garner's postgame

« on: May 18, 2007, 02:27:04 pm »

What irritates me about that crap, aside from the fact that the Astros made many mistakes that may have ultimately cost them the game, is that JJO and others ask why Garner decided to pitch to Winn without considering his other options. If he puts Winn on, then Lewis is up with 2 on. He's been hot lately (.393 avg). What's to say he wouldn't have put them ahead, perhaps by 2 or 3 runs? Or perhaps you load the bases for Klesko? I definitely don't see that as a better option than simply pitching to Winn. JJO is just being ridiculous and ignorant as always.

what gets me is he is up in arms about garner pitching to (here is the important part) randy winn ... randy ... winn ... 

53

Talk Zone / Re: A Third Baseman that is available

« on: May 17, 2007, 03:05:26 pm »

RK PLAYER           TEAM  AB   R   H  2B  3B  HR  RBI   SB CS  BB  SO  BA    OBP   SLG  OPS
11 Scott Rolen       STL  120 15  26  6   1    2    15    1   2   10  18  .217  .291  .333  .624
12 Morgan Ensberg HOU  108 19  23  6   0    2    11    0   0   17  25  .213  .317  .324  .642

Ok--so Rolen has a greater injury liability, and looking at these stats for this year there is really not much difference.

Is the only reason you want him because he has the possibility of a greater upside?

yes and of course since we are dealing in nonsense - hypothetically, Washington would have no intrest in Pujols or Howard because it would be no upgrade over Dimitre Young ...

54

Talk Zone / Re: ACL - Non bb

« on: May 11, 2007, 03:48:22 pm »

Obviously Arcade Fire, Wilco, Dylan, Spoon, Yo La tengo are going to be great … they all put on fantastic shows when I’ve seen them …  But if your there check out some of the lesser known local Texas fare … as good as any - Midlake, Ghostland Observatory, and sound team … all great … ghostland puts on as good a show as anyone on the bill (not to mention their tunes are effing awesome) … soundteam is a really good band especially if you dig arcade fire, spoon, and clap your hands .... and Midlake's song roscoe is as good as I've heard in a couple of years ...

I love reading the bill every year and seeing a band like ghostland observatory next to a band like crosscanadian rag weed … possibly one of my favorite bands and one of my least … like reading the Decembrists and then the indigo girls … I suppose that’s variety ... 

55

Talk Zone / Re: ACL - Non bb

« on: May 10, 2007, 12:09:00 pm »

I'll probably skip the festival and go to the aftershows instead.

bingo ... I'd much rather see a full show of a few bands rather than short set glimpses of 15 with average sound in 100 degree heat ... just me though ...

56

Talk Zone / Re: Tommy John surgery for Nieve

« on: May 09, 2007, 11:15:26 pm »

I'd go with "taintstain".

Taint Misbehavin' ?

57

Talk Zone / Re: Justice's Dull Little Brother

« on: May 08, 2007, 10:53:09 am »

that article is effing awful ... most of his statements are gross oversimplifications or just outright false ...

my favorite point was that the astros are not able to “stay on an even course” because of McLane's over meddling.  I may have been in a hole but I haven’t noticed a rash of over meddling- and  I wonder how has our franchise has been in terms of winning compared to other franchises during McLane's tenure ... that might be a good indicator of how "on course" this franchise is.  This article is a perfect example of forming an opinion based on thin fucking air and re-writing the facts to support it.

58

Talk Zone / Re: Now that Clemens in gone

« on: May 07, 2007, 04:09:14 pm »

"You're never as good as you look when you're going well, and you're never as bad as you look when you're going bad." - Jeff Kent

This old baseball adage works well to define what a seperates a real contender from a pretender.  Don't look at how well or how badly they're playing and make decisions about their legitimacy.  Look at the makeup of the team, the talent levels, the pitching, the health (or lack of injuries) and the amount of luck that plays into a winning season.  You have to have breaks go your way in order to survive a marathon.  Branch Rickey says that luck is "preparation meeting opportunity" and he's right of course.  If you have talent (and this will surprise everyone I'm sure... but almost all of the major league teams have talent to spare), prepared to meet the opportunity to excel.  If you have leveraged all on pitching, you're doing well... IMHO... to maintain your edge towards a contender status.  If breaks go your way, you can be the "from start to finish" winner during the marathon season because you've managed to minimize your injury factor and maximize your talent meeting opportunity factor.

Then the short season begins, and the best playing team will win it all.  Not necessarily what the long season said was the best, but who is playing the best.  And usually, by best, who is pitching the best by then.  The Cardinals last year were not the best team in the long season, heck the Astros almost took them out!  But towards the end of the season, something clicked and they pitched brilliantly.  The best team in the NL, the New York Mets, looked sad trying to keep up with the better playing (pitching) Cardinals, and so did the Tigers.  A few years back, the Seattle Mariners won 116 games during the season.  Mostly because the AL West was a feast of wins for them because the other three teams were not playing well at all.  By the time the Mariners got to the post season, they were exposed as not really being that good at all.  They got bumped in the first round of the post season by the Yankees, eventual losers in the WS to the Florida Marlins.

So overall, it think you can say that the Brewers have everything going their way right now and I would leave it at that.  The marathon season may even prove that they are lucky enough to win from wire to wire.  But are they really good?  I dunno yet.  Time will tell.

well put ...

although just to nit pick a bit - I thought the Mariners lost in the ALCS - and I am not sure the mariners where exposed as not being good rather than simply being out played in a series by a good yankee's team whose pitching was perfoming better ... I'd also note that the west wasn't that bad with oakland winning 100 games and the rangers and angels each winning in the mid 70's I believe ... infact I think good arguments existed it was the best division in baseball

59

Talk Zone / Re: Now that Clemens in gone

« on: May 07, 2007, 03:47:14 pm »

based on what are they playing over their heads?

to break it down ... ze hitting and ze pitching ... jk - basically most of the hitters are playing a little above where I think most expected them to be but perhaps more so the starters are performing beyond expectation ... maybe they will keep it up - time will tell

They have the best record in baseball right now, they may not win 110 games, but does that mean they won't win 99? or 100?

I say give them some credit right now.

they may win 99 - they may win 80 - they may win 110 ... who knows ... they are playing really well right now - I certainly didn't mean to indicate otherwise ... but I am gonna hold off on giving them credit for winning 99 or 100 until they do ...

60

Talk Zone / Re: Now that Clemens in gone

« on: May 07, 2007, 11:40:25 am »

The brewers look good - no doubt ... and I think that was to be expected to a degree - however they are playing over their heads right now and will certainly come back to the pack, but I think its safe to assume they will be around all season - although I doubt they run away with anything ...

61

Talk Zone / Re: A quick thank to Astros.com

« on: May 04, 2007, 03:27:13 pm »

I think the pitching and defense angle gets over played now and again (sometimes it seems more like coach’s speak than statement) - likewise stat heads tend to overplay the offensive angle … but obviously they are all important … personally I like the stros approach at building around pitching (and defense in certain positions) because pitching (and to a lesser overall defense) to me seems to be the more consistent from game to game … obviously over the course of a season its pretty hard to get by without a good offense  - you really need both …  however come playoffs its the consistency of the pitching and defense that seems MUCH more reliable – and is probably just the nature of the beast with the high percentage of failure built into hitting – if you can’t rely on your pitching (and intertwined with that - defense) then you are rolling the dice relying on the ups and downs of offensive players once you land in the microscope of a 7 game series … this may be just one mans misperception though …

62

Talk Zone / Re: Perhaps the greatest call-in idiot of all time

« on: April 27, 2007, 05:55:46 pm »

yeah I remeber that ... he's a fan not a homer

different strokes ...

63

Talk Zone / Re: Perhaps the greatest call-in idiot of all time

« on: April 27, 2007, 04:38:50 pm »

I don't pick up on any NE bias ... he knows about the area but I don't see any bias or some deep seeded longing for an east coast job ... maybe thats just me but the only other thing he mentions with any regularity (other than 'cuse - which is completely understandable) is the islanders and its really only in passing when mentioning NHL scores ... its not like the guy is a yankees/knick homer

64

Talk Zone / Re: Perhaps the greatest call-in idiot of all time

« on: April 27, 2007, 02:17:14 pm »

it's odd from reading this thread because I think CP is far and away the best sports guy in Houston ... I think he overplays "the bring them up younger card" (because there aren't many good examples of the astros just sitting on guys - but the criticism isn't completely unfounded its just not as extreme as he makes it out to be - and to me it its more a criticism of developing top flight young offensive talent (berkaman aside) in that the astros typically haven't drafted young top offensive talent out of HS and have gone to the college ranks hence getting kids a couple of years older – he loves to point to a player like Reyes who was brought up quick – but I am certain if the astros had a kid like reyes he would be brought up pretty quickly – now it likely wouldn’t be as fast as, say the mets, but he’d be up faster than most) ... so I think CP is off on that in that he ignores the draft history and looks at age in a vacuum - such as the fact a player like pence has been moved up with regularity but started after a couple years of college (i believe). Other than that to me CP is right on generally.

Frnakly, I think Granato overall is the worst. he knows a bit about the clubhouse dynamic having covered it but his baseball opinions border on what I could get from some slouch at a bar that thinks a hitter is measured in full by batting average and a pitcher by wins ...

as an aside it sounds to me like granato's got a good argument for the non compete - from what I read ...

65

Talk Zone / Re: for BU Webguy (or others), regarding Kip Wells

« on: April 10, 2007, 11:12:41 pm »

fwiw (very little - but as someone who went to BU with both he and jennings) ...  I will not be shocked to see Kip have a nice bounce back season - in fact I expect it to a degree - he still has ability and the cards have been like the braves the past couple of years interms of second lives for pitchers ... it seems a good environment ... certainly better than where he's coming from ...

66

Talk Zone / Re: Kennedy on Garner

« on: April 10, 2007, 10:56:59 pm »

I wonder how much of lidges slider for strikes are a result of batters bitting versus throwing actual strikes ... seems to me it never was a pitch he had the kind of control over that they insinuate he had ... ... which of course could be nothing more that moronic speculation ...

67

Talk Zone / Re: Rice area (non-bb)

« on: April 06, 2007, 11:40:52 am »

Good golly... that website is horrible.  Do they really need the midi music playing while you're trying to look at the menu?!

Never heard of the place so I'd like to try it, but... 

*shudders*

Actually, the music thankfully turns off when you look at the menu.  Do it quickly!!

Antica Osteria is as good as any place in town ... one of my favorites ... don't let the website detract, its really good

68

Talk Zone / Re: Retire JR Richard Jersey (ESPN Page 2)

« on: April 06, 2007, 11:21:23 am »

I do think the other pitchers have a little somehting else beyond JR. Dierker has the booth and the years managing and scott has '86 ... now don't get me wrong if those guys deserve to have their number retired JR does to ... I am just not sure those guys deserve to have their number retired ... close call on all

69

Talk Zone / Re: Why the game was lost, Part II.

« on: April 04, 2007, 02:33:44 pm »

just not enough. when he peeled off, Burke had no chance.

it looked to me like both players didn't have much of a chance to get that ball ... but I might have had a bad angle

70

Talk Zone / Re: Advice for first trip to MMPUS

« on: April 02, 2007, 03:48:12 pm »

Mispelled Irmas, sorry.  Here is its location.

Irma's.

  22 Chenevert St off Franklin   Houston TX 77002 713.222.0767 

also another irmas pretty close to the park on the southwest side ... has a little bit more varied menu - pretty good though ...

71

Talk Zone / Re: Advice for first trip to MMPUS

« on: April 02, 2007, 03:46:42 pm »

IMHO, does not hold a stick to Pappas (also located downtown but not walking distance from MMP).  Burgers are good at Ottos.

none of em hold a stick to Thelma's which is also somewhat close to the park ...

72

Talk Zone / Re: Rosters

« on: April 01, 2007, 03:45:28 pm »

I expect to see a little more shock at Bruntlett clearing waivers ...

73

Talk Zone / Re: Batting order thread

« on: March 28, 2007, 04:20:14 pm »

I hope like hell you are right, I will just reiterate that he does not belong in the two spot just because he is not doing his job.

I agree thats no reason ... however just to note my original point was, situation permitting you should take advantage of what you can get  (no replacements / no good regular options at 2) ... certainly not hit him 2 because he stinks at 5

for the record I like both Lamb and Loretta as replacements (obviously questions exists as to each’s D long term) - if they are available playing well and morgan can't cut it -

hell, as an aside, if we are talking about a 2 hitter I like Loretta just about as much as anyone hitting second ... 

74

Talk Zone / Re: Batting order thread

« on: March 28, 2007, 03:38:04 pm »

I like Everett and on base is certainly not all there is to hitting second ... but the tools Everett brings to the table - including speed and situational hitting don't in my mind make up for the big deficiency in other areas(namely on base). So in that sense I think Ensberg would be a better #2 because the one area he generally excels – he is just that much better … even though his situational hitting is weaker; that said I would rather not have either hit 2nd …

On another note I know the mentality around here is if ensberg can’t hit 5 then get rid of him but if there is not an adequate everyday replacement for him then I think the smart move is to take advantage of what he does give you … so if you have a position in the lineup open that can take advantage of his ability to get on base then you hit him there (again assuming no one is already performing well there – in which case you are stuck with him lower in the lineup). Ensberg is by no means a bad number 2 hitter the problem is that he is the player with the greatest potential to be a good 5 hitter this year and if he can’t do it then we may have a problem.  However if he can’t serve in that capacity and is doing other things well then the club should take advantage of what he is doing well.

Of course If he is doing nothing well then its and easy choice to sit him and If there is an adequate everyday replacement at third then it’s an easy choice too.

75

Archive / Re: Pence is starting

« on: March 07, 2007, 06:06:14 pm »

Quote:

Quote:
Like Luke Scott.

Lane's playing for a backup role right now.  Ain't no way Pence should play backup in Houston.

Scott is what, 28?  That's the problem.  He was tearing it up in the minors forever, was given a brief chance in the bigs when he was old by rookie standards, failed, was sent back to exile, and now finally has made it back.

False.

Scott, as has been pointed out, was buried behind SIGNIFICANTLY better prospects and more importantly SIGNIFICANTLY better performers in the Cleveland system until he was 25 ...  Also Scott got a late start being drafted out of college and I don?t believe he played professional ball until he was 23 ? Also he was not tearing it up in the minors in fact he was pretty unspectacular (not awful but certainly not warranting attention) ? in fact Scott didn?t have a really standout year in the minors until he was 26 and the very next season following his big year the Astros gave him a shot with the big club ?

Scott is not an example of what you want him to be ? in fact once he started to perform the astros got him up pretty quick ? can?t always take age in a vacuum ?

76

Archive / Re: Pence is starting

« on: March 07, 2007, 11:29:50 am »

Quote:

Quote:
I certainly think the club?s philosophy with pitchers has a good track record ? but I am not so sure on the hitters, although I don?t think its an issue of not promoting top prospects in a timely manner ... to me it seems its more an issue of an overall lack of top flight offensive talent compounded by good talent already holding positions at the Major league level ? I can?t really think of many (if any) position prospects that should have been up earlier (and the few who where delayed where delayed for reasons of positional log jams ? not any kind of philosophy of letting good players sit in the minors) ? I think some of the late promotions overall reflect a lack of top offensive talent in the system rather than a philosophy of delaying players promotions ? additionally (and I am completely guessing on this point) it seems the top offensive players in recent years have been college draftees which is not really going to put them in the bigs until 23 or 24 at the earliest ? Berkman  for instance was a top offensive prospect and came through the system pretty quickly ?

I don't think the Astros system can take too much credit for Lance Berkman. Other than staying out of his way.

I agree with you there ...

77

Archive / Re: Pence is starting

« on: March 07, 2007, 11:22:57 am »

I certainly think the club?s philosophy with pitchers has a good track record ? but I am not so sure on the hitters, although I don?t think its an issue of not promoting top prospects in a timely manner ... to me it seems its more an issue of an overall lack of top flight offensive talent compounded by good talent already holding positions at the Major league level ? I can?t really think of many (if any) position prospects that should have been up earlier (and the few who where delayed where delayed for reasons of positional log jams ? not any kind of philosophy of letting good players sit in the minors) ? I think some of the late promotions overall reflect a lack of top offensive talent in the system rather than a philosophy of delaying players promotions ? additionally (and I am completely guessing on this point) it seems the top offensive players in recent years have been college draftees which is not really going to put them in the bigs until 23 or 24 at the earliest ? Berkman  for instance was a top offensive prospect and came through the system pretty quickly ?

78

Talk Zone / Re: Astros trade for Jennings

« on: December 13, 2006, 03:02:47 am »

I think Jennings is going to be a solid number 2; actually I think as highly of Jennings as I do Garland ? obviously his numbers are skewed by coors but I tend to think you can?t just look at home/road splits because I think pitchers tend to adjust for coors and the adverse affect bleeds in to their road performances as well (although to a lesser degree obviously) ? any way my two cents - I think Jennings will outshine many pitchers next season with better reputations now that he is out from the handicapping effect of coors field and the team that played in it ?

As for what the stros lost I have never been high on Willy and thought to a degree he was more show than results (ie exciting player whose style made it easy to overlook his offensive productivity or lack of) ? I didn?t really think Taylor B would ever get there ? but admittedly I can?t say I have watched Hirsh enough to have an educated opinion (so I?ll defer to others)? although what I did see oddly enough he reminded me of Elarton ?

I think the stros gave up some potential, sure, but nothing IMO they couldn't part with and I am not really sure I see it coming back to bite them ...

79

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 02:06:35 pm »

Quote:

Quote:
I under stand your being consistent ... and to that end I think too much has on occasion been made of pujols (to a lesser degree because I think different etiquettes apply in baseball)

I've made all sorts of concessions towards the differences in the NFL and MLB.  I have also gone to great pains to let everyone know I do not follow the NFl much and just barely follow college football.  I have no idea what stands for ettiquette and what does not in that sense.  But I can tell you that much of what has been said about Pujols is warranted.

Quote:
... generally I tend to think hyper analyzing little things like this lead to over criticism (or intern over-praise) when judging a persons character

We would be without any conversation about Pettitte and Pujols if things like this would be ignored.  I offered my opinion only and I never said he *WAS* a person of dubious character.  I said he *MAY* become one given the things I've seen with my untrained eye.

Quote:
- but that?s just me and I could be nieve ... after all I am but a clark ...

you certainly could be right but I happen to think Vince is a long way from heading down the TO path ... reasonable minds can differ ...

Where did I say he was a minor step into a full blown TO?

perhaps I took your TO comparison to be more than it was ... I felt the insinuation of your posts where that he was 1) heading down a TO path 2) was a punk and hopefully someone like Jeff Fisher can straighten him out before it was too late ...  and that all just struck me as a little ridiculous ... it seems I might have read more into your posts than was there  - if so then its my bad (I don?t feel like re reading the whole thread to find out if this is true or not)

and either way you certainly have made your opinions known with this last post and as I said reasonable minds can differ ...

80

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 01:51:12 pm »

Quote:

I didn't strike the Heisman pose, he did.  If I am to be consistent, then I think it is unfair to bash Andy Pettitte in here and also Albert Pujols because we are *all* trying to find the bad in them even if their own words and behavior give rise to our own concerns about them.

I am not intentionally putting anything on you ?  where we differ is likely the degree we impugn things like this to some ones character ? and as I said I may be a little nieve and not giving things like this enough weight in my own perceptions and that is something I certainly could be guilty of ?

81

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 01:41:06 pm »

I under stand your being consistent ... and to that end I think too much has on occasion been made of pujols (to a lesser degree because I think different etiquettes apply in baseball) ... generally I tend to think hyper analyzing little things like this lead to over criticism (or in turn over-praise) when judging a persons character - but that?s just me and I could be nieve ... after all I am but a clark ...

you certainly could be right but I happen to think Vince is a long way from heading down the TO path ... reasonable minds can differ ...

82

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 12:59:47 pm »

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Here you go Noe

OK, that's being a punk.

Remember, he did this *after* he vowed never to do such a classless thing right after the Tech game.  He freaking apologized for doing it after the Tech game when called out on it by the press.  Even made a joke about it, saying he won't strike that pose again unless he *wins the Heisman* because it was just a little bit of egging on by teammates after a seriously good game and dramatic win over Tech (winning touchdown run?).

And then, lo and behold he did it again after the Rose Bowl.  I am just a bit concerned about the grounding of the young man.  Men like Jeff Fisher will be good for him though.  I respect Fisher and how he dealt with his lineman's behavior when he stepped in the face of a Dallas Cowboy center (and I am not a Cowboy fan by any stretch of the imagination).

to me that seemed tongue 'n cheek and just didn't rub me the wrong way (and I am not really a texas fan) ...  we all see things differently I suppose ? but I do think its a little broad sweeping to question his character based on this incident ... I mean to me it seemed ?all in good fun? especially considering he had just won the national championship ?

Okay, I'll try this again: He did this *AFTER* he had already been chided for doing in a game versus Tech!  It is not an isolated incident.  I think it was classless because he should've learned from a previous incident that it is just not something you want to do.

And he said himself he was wrong.  Yet he did it *AGAIN*!

I can see why someone would see punk in this but I think your making too much of it - particularly to any broad sweeping judgments on his character ... what do they say about looking for the bad in folks ... anyway to me he shows more good than not ... but that is just one mans opinion, and I have certainly been wrong before ...

83

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 12:39:29 pm »

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Here you go Noe

OK, that's being a punk.

Remember, he did this *after* he vowed never to do such a classless thing right after the Tech game.  He freaking apologized for doing it after the Tech game when called out on it by the press.  Even made a joke about it, saying he won't strike that pose again unless he *wins the Heisman* because it was just a little bit of egging on by teammates after a seriously good game and dramatic win over Tech (winning touchdown run?).

And then, lo and behold he did it again after the Rose Bowl.  I am just a bit concerned about the grounding of the young man.  Men like Jeff Fisher will be good for him though.  I respect Fisher and how he dealt with his lineman's behavior when he stepped in the face of a Dallas Cowboy center (and I am not a Cowboy fan by any stretch of the imagination).

to me that seemed tongue 'n cheek and just didn't rub me the wrong way (and I am not really a texas fan) ...  we all see things differently I suppose ? but I do think its a little broad sweeping to question his character based on this incident ... I mean to me it seemed ?all in good fun? especially considering he had just won the national championship ?

84

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 12:16:07 pm »

Quote:

Quote:
? hell in the national championship game when he scored the eventual winning touchdown he was the only person on the field not going crazy ? he calmly walked back to the sidelines with the ball?

I watched a different Vince Young then, because he went right over to the stands and did a "Yeah, I'm the man" sort of pose and was yelling something at them.

I think we are thinking of 2 different moments - when he went over to the stands that was after the game was over and he was celebrating winning the national championship ... I can't fault him for that ... after he scored the winning TD while the game was still going on he was completely calm and in fact telling team mates to calm down as there was still game to be played ...

I just haven't seen the side of Vince your describing ? to me he always seems courteous and respectful in interviews and the celebration to me (for the most part) has been limited to post game celebrating after winning big games (which he has done quite a few times) ?  but you may have seen more things than I have so I may be missing something ?

85

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 12:06:11 pm »

Quote:

Quote:
Enthusiasm after you win a big game / or / after completing a come from behind win is more than ok in my book ? frankly its nice to see - I don?t see how that?s bad sportsmanship ?

It?s the excessive celebration or pre rehearsed touchdown dances after touchdowns or sacks or whatever smaller in game moments that I consider ?punkish? and I have never noticed Vince doing much of that ? hell in the national championship game when he scored the eventual winning touchdown he was the only person on the field not going crazy ? he calmly walked back to the sidelines with the ball ?

Frankly I consider Vince one of the good guys in that respect ?

BTW, could you please remove the URL from your signature.  As innocuous as it may seem, we have a strict rule against pimping another site, even if it's your own.

cool no biggie ... didn't realize, thanks for the heads up ...

86

Talk Zone / Re: Vince Young (non BB but what a CFer he would be)

« on: December 11, 2006, 10:22:30 am »

Enthusiasm after you win a big game / or / after completing a come from behind win is more than ok in my book ? frankly its nice to see - I don?t see how that?s bad sportsmanship ?

It?s the excessive celebration or pre rehearsed touchdown dances after touchdowns or sacks or whatever smaller in game moments that I consider ?punkish? and I have never noticed Vince doing much of that ? hell in the national championship game when he scored the eventual winning touchdown he was the only person on the field not going crazy ? he calmly walked back to the sidelines with the ball ?

Frankly I consider Vince one of the good guys in that respect ?

87

Talk Zone / Re: Guitar Info (non-BB)

« on: December 10, 2006, 10:56:18 pm »

used to know a guy here in town that was REAL good at the stick ... can't remember his name but he used to play at rhythm room quite bit ... not sure of anyone that teaches it  - folks a rockin robin wold know if there was or not - i'd give them a call

88

Talk Zone / Re: Guitar Info (non-BB)

« on: December 10, 2006, 10:38:44 pm »

cool ... hopefully it'll work out; sight unseen is always fun but for 60 bucks its not like there is a risk, really have enjoyed mine ... I actually recorded with the Bass yesterday and its funny because I get comments on the bass everytime I bring it out (its a shortscale/thin neck gibson SG body style that doesn't sound like a short scale) ... anyway hope you get a good one ... let me know how it sounds ...

side note i would expect some easy tweeks (tuners or set up or something) ... for instance on both of my ventura's I replaced the tuners ... not sure if it is something specific to all ventura's but its an easy tweek - that helped both ...

89

Talk Zone / Re: Roy is a winner.

« on: December 06, 2006, 06:19:04 pm »

Quote:
After a polite email requesting the young Astros ace be added to the existing top ten list in career winning pct., he now resides firmly in 8th place, based on a minimum of 1,000 innings pitched.

The Link

interesting read ... I had no idea Colon's or Well's winning % was that high ...

90

Talk Zone / Re: Guitar Info (non-BB)

« on: December 04, 2006, 04:39:18 pm »

another nice find is to buy any mid early 70's Ventura guitars ? semi hard to find but they will surface now and again ?

Ventura is a japanese company that bought a ton of the top gibson?s, martins, and fender?s in the late 60?s and dissected / them figured out exactly how they where made and reproduced them to the T? then sold them for next to nothing (Gibson/fender sued them and put them out of business) ? the models they made are great and for all practical purposes generally very close the guitars they emulate ? they are often referred to as the lawsuit guitars ?

if you ever come across one buy it, they are usually very inexpensive because most folks don?t pay attention to them ...  

I have an early 70 ventura EB-3 model bass and play it more than anything I own (cost me 80 bucks) ... and I also have a ventura V-25 I came across for about 150 bucks (Martin knock off) ? and it plays nearly as good as my 1969 Gibson J-160e ? they?re the best secret in guitars IMO (if you can find them) ?

91

Talk Zone / Re: Guitar Info (non-BB)

« on: December 04, 2006, 12:29:56 am »

who'd a thunk my first OWA post would be on guitars ... then again maybe it makes sense ...

I usually tell folks trying to learn to get a mid level epiphone acoustic (prol around 400) ... they are well made and easily good enough to keep beyond beginner levels (also what ever guitar you get make sure they set it up for you - it makes a huge difference) ... I also think Alvarez is a really underrated inexpensive mid level guitar that plays very well ... shoot I?ve recorded with Alvarez?s before and use one live fairly frequently ? each guitar is different though if you find something you like and it plays well / feels good then go with it ?  

buy used if you can ... for the kind of guitar you want you?ll get more guitar for the buck ?  

on strings I always play john pearse lights ... most shops have them and they are the best sounding, personally I can't stand the coated strings but someone just learning won't be able to tell the difference ... so strings aren't a huge deal

anyway that?s my two cents ?