Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

schillingouttheks

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    16,259

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by schillingouttheks

  1. schillingouttheks
    Yes.
  2. schillingouttheks
  3. schillingouttheks
    I was lol-ing at the use of the word "try". If the Yankees want someone, they will offer a ridiculous amount of money to get them. They don't have to try very hard is what I was trying to convey.
  4. schillingouttheks
    lol try.
  5. schillingouttheks
    What are you talking about? The top of the East is just as good, if not better, than the top of the West. Last year specifically, you could argue that the East had the better top 3 all-around.
  6. schillingouttheks
    Here's a trivia question for you: Which team won the World Series, prior to 2009, with the largest payroll of any World Series winner?
  7. schillingouttheks
    2000 was the 10th year of the 90's. If you want to argue semantics, Dojji's argument will win, because it's fact. EDIT: Though the decade is 2001-2010, not 2000-2010 or even 2001-2011. Wtf? 10 years. 2001 through 2010 is 10 years. That said, arguing semantics for this cause is just not worth it, so whatever. And jacko, team of the 2000s has many different definitions. If one team will be in peoples' minds 30 years down the road when they revisit this decade, the Red Sox will be at the forefront. Most successful? Yes, Yankees, but what the Red Sox did was more memorable and had more historic value, so, yes, you could argue that the Red Sox were the team of the decade. The original question was not "who was the most successful" either.
  8. schillingouttheks
    Are you done killing your own line?
  9. schillingouttheks
    Too bad Philly blunts are the epitome of absolute garbage cigars. Even if you're not using them for what they're made for, the still suck. Dutches or Swisha Sweets.
  10. schillingouttheks
    Doesn't matter because it will be remembered as a Sox decade anyway because of the 2004 fiasco and then following up 3 years later. You know that, even if it's not how it should be.
  11. schillingouttheks
    That's not what I was saying. I would give him $11M/yr as well. If you were running this team, Rondo would have just agreed to a $15M/yr contract, and that's a large difference. You didn't say you wanted more years to begin with, you said you would have given him nearly anything to keep him here. Stop back-tracking and trying to wiggle out of the position. I never called Rondo mediocre. But if we were to change the market so that we give Chris Paul $21M/yr like you would give him, Rondo would be making around $17M/yr, and mediocre players would be making $11M/yr. Do you see why you need to set a value to certain players and not freely spend whatever you're willing to and ignore the consequences of it? Rondo would never get $15M/yr.
  12. schillingouttheks
    Jason Kidd doesn't deserve 21.5 million. That doesn't mean that Chris Paul should be paid 21 million. That's how markets start getting f***ed up and mediocre players start getting paid $11M/yr. I am very happy you are not this team's GM, because the investments you'd be making would bring us right back to the pre-Big 3 era.
  13. schillingouttheks
    Okay, so you think Rondo can be just as good as Chris Paul? Because you don't give a player $15M/yr if you don't think he has the potential to be as good as Chris Paul. If you really decide to stand by what you say, I have no more to say to you.
  14. schillingouttheks
    I can't believe that each point is still going right over your head. Unbelievable. I can't even explain why you don't understand these points because YOU WON'T GET IT. If you say you'll give Rondo $15M/yr (WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID), and Paul makes $17M/yr, aren't those two salaries pretty similar? Rondo is not even close to the type of player Chris Paul is. So WHY would you give him even CLOSE to Chris Paul money when that money can be used more economically for a BETTER INVESTMENT? GOD.
  15. schillingouttheks
    The twilight of one's career, to me, is when his best days are behind him and he's had a few major injuries and/or surgeries that are enough to cause some concern about his production going forward. Yes, he's still a great player, and yes, he still puts up great numbers, but he is an injury away from missing significant time due to his age and prior injuries, ESPECIALLY with his ankles. If you were to build your team around Ray Allen, I would immediately want to be the GM of a team in your division.
  16. schillingouttheks
    In the middle of all of this, I have completely lost sight of what your point is. Are you trying to convince people that he's not in the twilight of his career? I'm sorry, but you're not going to win too many people over. While still top-tier, he is not the elite player he once was. Maybe if you try to explain what your point is, I'll be able to better argue, but it's really difficult to get the point out of your posts. Maybe it's the way you're typing. Idk.
  17. schillingouttheks
  18. schillingouttheks
    This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. A percentage doesn't deteriorate based on how many attempts he gets. If you're a 55% shooter, you will hit 55% of your shots, whether it's 60 shots or 600 shots.
  19. schillingouttheks
    To get into the ACC Championship game BC doesn't have to worry about Virginia Tech, as they'd play them in the title game if they were to come out of the Coastal (unlikely since Ga Tech now has essentially a 2-game lead over them and Miami). The ACC Atlantic is very weak. With Va Tech losing, BC's chances of playing Ga Tech instead increased incredibly since Ga Tech beat Va Tech, but Clemson also has to lose since they're also at the top of the Atlantic, and they hold the tiebreaker over BC. Either way, I would so much rather play Georgia Tech. lol if we're able to sneak into the Orange Bowl. Sorry, back to Pedro vs Yankees...
  20. schillingouttheks
    I LOVE BC HOCKEY. Good God. Not only do I go to BC, but I've been a fan since my childhood. I remember the 2001 squad very well and my cousin was on the 2008 team. I've loved beating the Sioux on a yearly basis in the tourney. :harhar: Except last year... that sucked. Such a young team, but we got a lot of experience. We'll be right back there this year. f*** BU.
  21. schillingouttheks
  22. schillingouttheks
    FSU @ #2 BC (which has been erased from my mind completely) and Miami @ BC like 5 years ago.
  23. schillingouttheks
    ... he didn't punch LeBron James...
  24. schillingouttheks
    The Vikes are probably going to be favored by around 3 or 4, so I'm debating teasing it and taking the Packers at +9 or +10 and moving the over/under accordingly. Or I could take the Vikes at +2 or +3 but that makes less sense I feel.
  25. schillingouttheks
    I dunno what to do about tonight's game. I can see either team winning a close game. I plan on putting some money down on the game but I don't know if I should tease it and move the over/under with the line or just pick the line straight up. Damn.
×
×
  • Create New...