PDA

View Full Version : Who starts opening day?


Rdy2PlayBall
10-19-2009, 07:07 PM
Peavy or Buehrle? Mainly asking... who becomes our number 1? Of course Peavy is a better number 1 candidate over Buehrle, but Buehrle is consistent and has been our ace forever. I say give Buehrle opening day and see what happens... then we'll see if Peavy becomes the one we try to get more starts by the end of the season.

Regardless, this 1-2 punch is going to be amazing... Don't forget about the 3-4 punch... and if Freddy is Freddy.... our 5th punch. @_@

sullythered
10-19-2009, 07:10 PM
It's really pretty arbitrary who the "#1" is in the rotation. Buehrle probably starts opening day, though, because of his history with us.

guillen4life13
10-19-2009, 07:11 PM
Buehrle.

Whoever starts opening day isn't necessarily the best pitcher on the squad. To me, it should be Buehrle because he's earned it and has stayed true to this team for so long (and done so well during that span). He deserves the honor again.

GoGoCrede
10-19-2009, 07:11 PM
Floyd.






:D:

No, really. Buehrle.

doublem23
10-19-2009, 07:16 PM
Burls, gives him the franchise record for Opening Day starts.

gobears1987
10-19-2009, 07:18 PM
It's got to be Buehrle

chisoxfanatic
10-19-2009, 07:21 PM
Buehrle, because it's probably going to be a cold day, and it would allow fans to get warm sooner. :tongue:

Brian26
10-19-2009, 07:41 PM
Buehrle would have eight in a row right now if Ozzie hadn't given Contreras the start in '07.

I bet Ozzie gives it to Peavy next year. Just a hunch...because that's the way Ozzie operates.

WhiteSox1989
10-19-2009, 07:50 PM
Buehrle would have eight in a row right now if Ozzie hadn't given Contreras the start in '07.

I bet Ozzie gives it to Peavy next year. Just a hunch...because that's the way Ozzie operates.

I hope it's Buehrle, but I think you're right.

sox1970
10-19-2009, 08:02 PM
Logical topic on October 19.

Buehrle will, but I don't think he even cares anymore. He pretty much said he would start Peavy on OD.

Rdy2PlayBall
10-19-2009, 08:04 PM
Burls, gives him the franchise record for Opening Day starts.I was thinking about that when I posted this. I hope Ozzie is nice and just gives him the start... He let Danks pitch 200 innings when he probably would have been taken out a little sooner in some of the last starts he had, so Ozzie seems to be a nice guy. :D:

Logical topic on October 19.
Sarcasm? Why not? It's not like were are going to get anyone else to give us a reason to wait until spring.

JB98
10-19-2009, 08:04 PM
Peavy, without question. He's our ace.

They've already talked about moving Buehrle down in the rotation.

Domeshot17
10-19-2009, 08:12 PM
Peavy. Buehrle didn't earn opening day with his performance this year. Peavy not only pitched his butt off for us when he came back, but his actions of apologizing to Ozzie for being hurt and such make me think hes hungry to win.

Lip Man 1
10-19-2009, 08:35 PM
Let's wait and see who is in the rotation come spring training first before asking.

The rotation should be set but a lot of folks are speculating that one or two players you don't expect could be traded this off season.

Lip

BadBobbyJenks
10-19-2009, 08:50 PM
My rotation in 2010 is:

Peavy
Danks
Floyd
Buehrle
Garcia

doublem23
10-19-2009, 08:58 PM
Peavy. Buehrle didn't earn opening day with his performance this year. Peavy not only pitched his butt off for us when he came back, but his actions of apologizing to Ozzie for being hurt and such make me think hes hungry to win.

3.84 ERA, another 200 IP season, and oh yeah, the Perfecto.

What a bum!

Rdy2PlayBall
10-19-2009, 09:13 PM
My rotation in 2010 is:
Peavy
Danks
Floyd
Buehrle
GarciaI'd have Buehrle at least at 2 or 3 just because he is a definite 200 innings with a lot of quality starts. 4 seems like a stretch...

russ99
10-19-2009, 09:14 PM
Let's wait and see who is in the rotation come spring training first before asking.

The rotation should be set but a lot of folks are speculating that one or two players you don't expect could be traded this off season.

Lip

Understandable, but the only one that seemingly could be dealt is Danks, especially if he won't play ball on a contract again.

Peavy's set as our ace, Floyd has a cheap deal for the next two years, Freddy's signed cheap for a year and since he's going into his last contract year, Buehrle could be dealt, but the fanbase would be outraged if the Sox traded him.

Hudson could be a trade chip, but they should hold onto him unless the return is great.

I'd go with Peavy. He's a dominant starter in his prime and should handle the opposition in the cold and set the tone for the opening series.

october23sp
10-19-2009, 09:20 PM
Peavy, he's our ace.

DirtySox
10-19-2009, 09:21 PM
Understandable, but the only one that seemingly could be dealt is Danks, especially if he won't play ball on a contract again

I'll bet Danks signs a deal this offseason. He was right to hold out for a better offer after his '08 performance. He's younger, has a bit more potential than Gavin and is deserved of more money.

veeter
10-19-2009, 09:35 PM
I'd love for Mark to start opening day. But if they're setting up the rotation, it's Peavy, no doubt.

veeter
10-19-2009, 09:35 PM
I'll bet Danks signs a deal this offseason. He was right to hold out for a better offer after his '08 performance. He's younger, has a bit more potential than Gavin and is deserved of more money.I agree, Danks will sign.

doublem23
10-19-2009, 09:50 PM
I'd love for Mark to start opening day. But if they're setting up the rotation, it's Peavy, no doubt.

Nobody "sets up their rotation" on Opening Day.

thomas35forever
10-19-2009, 10:07 PM
Buehrle. Start the season with the man we have the utmost confidence in.

voodoochile
10-19-2009, 11:20 PM
I'm rooting for Sweatie Freddie to get the nod...

Boondock Saint
10-19-2009, 11:27 PM
It should be Peavy. You don't have a guy start the first game because of tenure, team history, or likability. You have your best pitcher go, because you want to have the guy that gives you the best chance of winning on the mound, and your opponent is doing the same thing. If you think Buehrle is that guy, that's fine. But, in my opinion, the only thing that Ozzie is going to take into consideration is who is going to get him win number one.

BleacherBandit
10-19-2009, 11:37 PM
I'm rooting for Sweatie Freddie to get the nod...

I was going to say you should teal that and then I realized it could really be your opinion. Hopefully Garcia plays somewhere remotely close to an opening day pitcher.

JermaineDye05
10-19-2009, 11:50 PM
Assuming he's healthy, you go with your ace.

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/10/03/alg_baseball_jake_peavy.jpg

I know some of you only saw him in those three starts. Trust me, this guy is legit. He's a bulldog. More importantly, he's a winner.

I still can't believe he's on our team.

guillensdisciple
10-20-2009, 01:26 AM
Peavy.

Next year can not come soon enough. I keep on looking at our rotation and my mouth drops to the floor every time I read over the line. Wowsers, I feel bad for the competition next year. I hope you guys are ready for the year of the Sox(White)!

skobabe8
10-20-2009, 08:34 AM
3.84 ERA, another 200 IP season, and oh yeah, the Perfecto.

What a bum!

LOL!

You go with Burls. Starting Opening Day is an honor and should be treated as such by going with a guy who has done as much for the organization as Mark has. Obviously he's an excellent starting pitcher, as well. As good as Peavy? No, but is there really much of a difference starting Peavy OD or game #2? No.

Sockinchisox
10-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Peavy.

voodoochile
10-20-2009, 11:51 AM
I was going to say you should teal that and then I realized it could really be your opinion. Hopefully Garcia plays somewhere remotely close to an opening day pitcher.

I assumed the sarcasm would be evident as Freddie is expected to be the 5th starter so letting him start opening day would obviously be a joke.

I think BurlyMon should get the honor, personally. I don't think it's that big of a deal from how the season goes perspective, but it would show nice loyalty to the man who's spent his entire career here.

WhiteSox5187
10-20-2009, 11:52 AM
Don't we open on the road next year? If we do I wouldn't be as vehmently opposed to seeing Peavy start the way I was in '07 when Jose got the start. Either way, I think starting Opening Day is more of a sign of honor than of who is your best pitcher (I can recall Greg Maddux opening the Cubs season in '04 even though Wood and Prior were the better pitchers), it's a nice honor for Buerhle and I say give it to him.

Sockinchisox
10-20-2009, 12:55 PM
Don't we open on the road next year? If we do I wouldn't be as vehmently opposed to seeing Peavy start the way I was in '07 when Jose got the start. Either way, I think starting Opening Day is more of a sign of honor than of who is your best pitcher (I can recall Greg Maddux opening the Cubs season in '04 even though Wood and Prior were the better pitchers), it's a nice honor for Buerhle and I say give it to him.

No we open at home.

Ranger
10-20-2009, 08:07 PM
Peavy. Buehrle didn't earn opening day with his performance this year. Peavy not only pitched his butt off for us when he came back, but his actions of apologizing to Ozzie for being hurt and such make me think hes hungry to win.

I hope you aren't suggesting Buehrle had a poor year. I understand he had only 2 wins in the last two months (which is what I assume you're basing this on), but he also had 4 no decisions (all of which should have been wins, including the 8 scoreless innings in Seattle) and had a loss where he pitched 7 innings of 2-run baseball.

As for Peavy, while I agree that guy is the real thing and he was good in his 3 starts, it was only 3 starts. I'm excited that he's here, but I don't think, just yet, he needs to start the opener.

It should be Peavy. You don't have a guy start the first game because of tenure, team history, or likability. You have your best pitcher go, because you want to have the guy that gives you the best chance of winning on the mound, and your opponent is doing the same thing. If you think Buehrle is that guy, that's fine. But, in my opinion, the only thing that Ozzie is going to take into consideration is who is going to get him win number one.

Opening day starter is a ceremonial thing, not a strategic thing. If the Sox didn't have anyone like Buehrle here, Peavy would go for sure.

Besides, with 162 games played and a number of chances to re-work the rotation over the season, the top 4 will all get about the same amount of starts anyway.

Now, all things being equal (meaning health, in particular), I doubt anyone but Buehrle starts on opening day.

Brian26
10-20-2009, 08:23 PM
I hope you aren't suggesting Buehrle had a poor year. I understand he had only 2 wins in the last two months (which is what I assume you're basing this on), but he also had 4 no decisions (all of which should have been wins, including the 8 scoreless innings in Seattle) and had a loss where he pitched 7 innings of 2-run baseball.

Buehrle had a few hard-luck no decisions in the first half as well, including the Pirates game on a Sunday afternoon when Jenks gave up a 9th inning homer with two outs to Craig Wilson.

Ranger
10-20-2009, 11:25 PM
Buehrle had a few hard-luck no decisions in the first half as well, including the Pirates game on a Sunday afternoon when Jenks gave up a 9th inning homer with two outs to Craig Wilson.

That one was a killer. Not the worst loss of the season (I give the nod to the debacle in Seattle), but still a killer.

Buehrle had a few bad starts immediately after his perfect streak ended, but he really wasn't nearly as bad in the second half as the myth suggests.

doublem23
10-20-2009, 11:41 PM
LOL!

You go with Burls. Starting Opening Day is an honor and should be treated as such by going with a guy who has done as much for the organization as Mark has. Obviously he's an excellent starting pitcher, as well. As good as Peavy? No, but is there really much of a difference starting Peavy OD or game #2? No.

Bingo. We're not talking about Game 1 of the ALDS, it's Opening Day, a day of pomp and circumstance, and oh yes, just 1 of 162 games in the year. Outside of the Big Hurt, no one has been bigger for this organization than Buehrle since the days of Nellie Fox. He deserves it.

Shoeless_Jeff
10-21-2009, 12:18 AM
Buehrle... without question.

JermaineDye05
10-21-2009, 12:43 AM
That one was a killer. Not the worst loss of the season (I give the nod to the debacle in Seattle), but still a killer.

Buehrle had a few bad starts immediately after his perfect streak ended, but he really wasn't nearly as bad in the second half as the myth suggests.

Which one? The one where Jenks blew the game for Danks or the one where we were all forced to watch 15 innings of BAD? It's hard to weigh which one was worse because we should have won both of them.

When I think of the worst losses, they all have one distinct element: John Danks.

It seemed like at the end of the year he got screwed out of a lot of potential wins such as the Mark Ellis walk-off in Oakland. I believe John left in the 8th with a 2-0 lead. There was also a game we nearly lost in Anaheim when Thornton AND Jenks blew the game, we were lucky enough to pull away with a win. Then of course that loss to Seattle which was horrible.

IMO Danks should have won 15-16 games this year.

Ranger
10-21-2009, 01:00 AM
Which one? The one where Jenks blew the game for Danks or the one where we were all forced to watch 15 innings of BAD? It's hard to weigh which one was worse because we should have won both of them.

When I think of the worst losses, they all have one distinct element: John Danks.

It seemed like at the end of the year he got screwed out of a lot of potential wins such as the Mark Ellis walk-off in Oakland. I believe John left in the 8th with a 2-0 lead. There was also a game we nearly lost in Anaheim when Thornton AND Jenks blew the game, we were lucky enough to pull away with a win. Then of course that loss to Seattle which was horrible.

IMO Danks should have won 15-16 games this year.

The 15 inning game. Buehrle 8 shutout innings, Pods picked off 3rd, etc.

slavko
10-21-2009, 09:53 AM
Buehrle... without question.

If this were the NBA, Buehrle would go into a season-long funk if he were denied this honor that he has earned over the years. But this isn't the NBA. Tough call. How do you get the rest of the rotation set up if he leads off? Do you make Mark #5 and let him work his way to #4 using early season off days and rainouts? (5,1,2,3,4,5, etc.)

Remember when he gave up his last start of the season so Esteban Loaiza could set "The Mexican Pitching Record?" So he might be OK with not leading off.

soltrain21
10-21-2009, 10:13 AM
Buehrle. Start the season with the man we have the utmost confidence in.

Why do we have the utmost confidence in him? He was awful down the stretch.

Red Barchetta
10-21-2009, 10:32 AM
Since Buehrle gave us the greatest single game of the 2009 season, I would give him the nod since they are opening at home. I think he deserves it.

I also think Peavy will become the true ace and since the game after opening day is known for poor attendance, what better way to put butts in the seat?!

Rockabilly
10-21-2009, 10:37 AM
Buehrle

Warriorjan
10-21-2009, 10:44 AM
Not only is this not the NBA (thank God) but it's MB we're talking about, he would never go into a season-long funk over some perceived slight. That's one reason why we all love him.
Mark has earned the right to hold the Sox record - he should start.

downstairs
10-21-2009, 11:48 AM
Zambrano.

FielderJones
10-21-2009, 12:27 PM
In recognition of many years of service, Buehrle. Peavy's still young. He'll have many opening day starts after Mark retires.

sox1970
10-21-2009, 12:48 PM
You can make a comparison to Brad Radke and Johan Santana. Santana was clearly the ace 2004-2006, but Radke kept starting opening day in 2004 and 2005. But then they gave up on that, and Johan started in 2006. If Peavy wins 18-20 games in 2010, I'm sure Buehrle will step aside for opening day duties after next year.

Craig Grebeck
10-21-2009, 12:51 PM
In recognition of many years of service, Buehrle. Peavy's still young. He'll have many opening day starts after Mark retires.
He's only two years younger.

munchman33
10-21-2009, 01:17 PM
I'd give it to Peavy, and I'd go Peavy-Danks-Gavin-Buehrle. They're all good choices (which is excellent). If Peavy's health for the long term is a concern (which I do not believe it is), I'd switch him and Gavin in the rotation.

tstrike2000
10-21-2009, 01:25 PM
Judging by the best pitcher on the staff I'd say Peavy, but no one will complain if Buehrle gets the nod.

southsideirish71
10-21-2009, 05:57 PM
I believe in having your best pitcher face your divisional opponents as much as possible. In the first 2 weeks of the season your number one faces the Indians twice and the Twins once. And before we have someone jump on the well its too early to talk about match-ups. 2008 and 2009 ended up with a game 163 to settle the division. And part of the reason we had a problem taking the division in 2009 was our horrible divisional record. The best way to win the division is to beat up on your divisional opponents. Rack up as many wins as we can early and get out of the gate as quickly as possible. And yes the Indians look to be bad on paper. Lots of bad teams on paper gave us fits last year.

JermaineDye05
10-21-2009, 06:02 PM
He's only two years younger.

Yeah but Buehrle has stated he plans to retire soon, I think he said like 3 or 4 years.

Craig Grebeck
10-21-2009, 06:46 PM
Yeah but Buehrle has stated he plans to retire soon, I think he said like 3 or 4 years.
The poster made it seem as though Jake is far younger than Mark, which is simply untrue. He made no statements about Mark's career plans.

oeo
10-21-2009, 06:53 PM
Why do we have the utmost confidence in him? He was awful down the stretch.

After the rough go following the perfecto, he was pretty good 'down the stretch.'

FielderJones
10-21-2009, 08:59 PM
The poster made it seem as though Jake is far younger than Mark, which is simply untrue. He made no statements about Mark's career plans.

Way to assume.

ChiSoxGirl
10-21-2009, 09:14 PM
Buehrle- he's more than earned it.

doublem23
10-21-2009, 11:20 PM
Why do we have the utmost confidence in him? He was awful down the stretch.

:scratch:

Did you just wake up from a 9-year coma?

delben91
10-22-2009, 05:44 AM
Judging by the best pitcher on the staff I'd say Peavy, but no one will complain if Buehrle gets the nod.

This is WSI. People here would complain that the sky is blue and thus indicates the upper atmosphere is a Cub fan.

voodoochile
10-22-2009, 08:51 AM
This is WSI. People here would complain that the sky is blue and thus indicates the upper atmosphere is a Cub fan.

Personally I blame her boyfriend the ocean who is always clad in flubbie blue. The sky is merely reflecting his blatant flubsession and dressing to please him. Though some will argue the sky started it...

doublem23
10-22-2009, 08:58 AM
Personally I blame her boyfriend the ocean who is always clad in flubbie blue. The sky is merely reflecting his blatant flubsession and dressing to please him. Though some will argue the sky started it...

The sky is a Sox fan 1/2 the time. :wink:

Rohan
10-22-2009, 07:18 PM
Probably Javier Vazquez...

MetroPD
10-23-2009, 06:38 PM
I was hoping maybe El Duque would get the nod.

chisoxfanatic
10-23-2009, 07:37 PM
I believe in having your best pitcher face your divisional opponents as much as possible. In the first 2 weeks of the season your number one faces the Indians twice and the Twins once. And before we have someone jump on the well its too early to talk about match-ups. 2008 and 2009 ended up with a game 163 to settle the division. And part of the reason we had a problem taking the division in 2009 was our horrible divisional record. The best way to win the division is to beat up on your divisional opponents. Rack up as many wins as we can early and get out of the gate as quickly as possible. And yes the Indians look to be bad on paper. Lots of bad teams on paper gave us fits last year.
I haven't been in this thread for a while, but I wanted to comment that I agree with you 100%. It befuddles me why some people consider games in April as "not as important" as games in September. Guess what, guys...every game bears equal importance. Our 2005 season was largely successful BECAUSE of our great start!

I think whomever impresses the most in spring training should start opening day. Starting the season off with a win is always huge, and whomever would give the team the best chance of doing that should be starting.

Rdy2PlayBall
10-23-2009, 08:37 PM
I haven't been in this thread for a while, but I wanted to comment that I agree with you 100%. It befuddles me why some people consider games in April as "not as important" as games in September. Guess what, guys...every game bears equal importance. Our 2005 season was largely successful BECAUSE of our great start!

I think whomever impresses the most in spring training should start opening day. Starting the season off with a win is always huge, and whomever would give the team the best chance of doing that should be starting.Wow, I couldn't agree more. I basically got banned for being mad at a loss half way through the season. Every win counts, if we had won just ONE more of the games the first month, there would have been no game 163 at the end of the season. We complain about the Sox not having the "drive" to win or something like that... they are probably just thinking the way many of us here do, "these games aren't important yet" :tongue:

I wouldn't say start the best pitcher in spring training... that might end up being some single A guy. @_@ The best of Buehrle or Peavy should work nicely... unless they are just horrible in ST. :o:

Also, the 0-8 start (or whatever it was) is what killed Detroit's 2008 season... and no one called those "unimportant" :?:

chisoxfanatic
10-23-2009, 08:57 PM
We complain about the Sox not having the "drive" to win or something like that... they are probably just thinking the way many of us here do, "these games aren't important yet" :tongue:

I think that a big problem with the Sox this year, and in other non-divisional-winning seasons in the recent past, has been their lack of a "killer instinct." If they took the first two games in a three-game series, they'd pretty much sit back, relax, and NOT strap it down the third game. They could've won the division had they possessed a little more of a killer instinct THIS season.

Rdy2PlayBall
10-23-2009, 09:08 PM
I think that a big problem with the Sox this year, and in other non-divisional-winning seasons in the recent past, has been their lack of a "killer instinct." If they took the first two games in a three-game series, they'd pretty much sit back, relax, and NOT strap it down the third game. They could've won the division had they possessed a little more of a killer instinct THIS season.You can blame Ozzie for the philosophy of "just keep winning the series"... Yah, you have to keep winning them, but you will lose some, so the sweeps even everything out. (and they are also a lot more fun :redneck).

A lot of you have terrible attendance records... The Sox were still descent at home this year... why are some of you so unlucky? :(:

chisoxfanatic
10-23-2009, 09:13 PM
A lot of you have terrible attendance records... The Sox were still descent at home this year... why are some of you so unlucky? :(:
I think we should all blame JB98 for attending Sox games. You see, the evil ghost of the Twins was super pissed off in reading that his beloved were crappy, perpetual losers, so he decided to make the Sox unable to dominate at their home ballpark this year. :tongue:

Considering we finished just 5 games over break-even at home this year, I would say that if anyone finished 1 or 2 games under break-even, it's not so bad.

I know it's a different team and sport, but I DID finish 18-1-6 attending Blackhawks games last season! I've pretty much had good fortunes in attending games. This past Sox season was the first time I have ever had a losing record for any team in a season.

Rdy2PlayBall
10-23-2009, 10:18 PM
I think we should all blame JB98 for attending Sox games. You see, the evil ghost of the Twins was super pissed off in reading that his beloved were crappy, perpetual losers, so he decided to make the Sox unable to dominate at their home ballpark this year. :tongue:

Considering we finished just 5 games over break-even at home this year, I would say that if anyone finished 1 or 2 games under break-even, it's not so bad.

I know it's a different team and sport, but I DID finish 18-1-6 attending Blackhawks games last season! I've pretty much had good fortunes in attending games. This past Sox season was the first time I have ever had a losing record for any team in a season.I guess that makes sense... but I still think the of the records like 2-8 are just scary. How unlucky can someone get!? :whiner: Last year the Sox dominated at home... so everyone seemed to be 20 games over .500. :tongue:

Last year I was 1-1 at Hawks games
This year I was 10-2 at Sox games! I didn't cheat either. I went to a Yankees game, Twins game, Boston game, Rays game, Angels games... all the big boys. I guess I just picked the perfect days! (expect I picked a few days before the perfecto. :whiner:)

chisoxfanatic
10-23-2009, 10:41 PM
I guess that makes sense... but I still think the of the records like 2-8 are just scary. How unlucky can someone get!? :whiner: Last year the Sox dominated at home... so everyone seemed to be 20 games over .500. :tongue:

Last year I was 1-1 at Hawks games
This year I was 10-2 at Sox games! I didn't cheat either. I went to a Yankees game, Twins game, Boston game, Rays game, Angels games... all the big boys. I guess I just picked the perfect days! (expect I picked a few days before the perfecto. :whiner:)
Yea, I was THINKING of going to the perfect game. It wasn't part of my season ticket package, but I live only 1 mile from the ballpark, so I can pretty much make going to a game a game time decision on any day or night. Too bad I chose to stay home. :whiner:

Truth be told, we all know how dominant we were in 2005 at home. Shockingly, my attendance record in that season was only 21-17, and it included the 3 playoff games I went to (Games 1 and 2 of the ALDS and Game 2 of the ALCS). :o:

JB98
10-23-2009, 11:21 PM
You can blame Ozzie for the philosophy of "just keep winning the series"... Yah, you have to keep winning them, but you will lose some, so the sweeps even everything out. (and they are also a lot more fun :redneck).

A lot of you have terrible attendance records... The Sox were still descent at home this year... why are some of you so unlucky? :(:

I traditionally go to a number of Sunday home games each season. That's why my attendance record sucked this year. The 2009 Sox were brutal on Sundays, both home and away.

ChiSoxGirl
10-24-2009, 01:08 AM
I traditionally go to a number of Sunday home games each season. That's why my attendance record sucked this year. The 2009 Sox were brutal on Sundays, both home and away.

I know a little something about that. :rolleyes: :angry:

JB98
10-25-2009, 12:05 AM
I know a little something about that. :rolleyes: :angry:

The wound was just starting to heal and I had to go and reopen it, didn't I? :tongue:

chisoxfanatic
10-25-2009, 12:07 AM
The wound was just starting to heal and I had to go and reopen it, didn't I? :tongue:
You should've gone during the week, then! :tongue:

I didn't go to a single Sunday game this past season. I'm thankful for that.

ChiSoxGirl
10-25-2009, 12:07 AM
The wound was just starting to heal and I had to go and reopen it, didn't I? :tongue:

Yeah. Thanks for that, my friend. :tongue:

tstrike2000
10-26-2009, 09:45 PM
I haven't been in this thread for a while, but I wanted to comment that I agree with you 100%. It befuddles me why some people consider games in April as "not as important" as games in September. Guess what, guys...every game bears equal importance. Our 2005 season was largely successful BECAUSE of our great start!

You hear that everyone! No befuddling when it comes to April baseball!