Bryan

4/5 reviews out right now say it's one of the best movies of the year. And claim that this is the film that will single-handedly resurrect the genre with beautiful cinematography, great acting and a poetic tone. 1/5 say it's terrible, contrived, poorly shot hackwork. Hollywood Reporter, unsurprisingly, is that one review.

Zito and Lowry are both awful. I guess your thinking of another Noah Lowry, 13-7 with that offense? not to mention 3.34 Era, but i'll take your word for it. Looks pretty right? Too bad he has a 1.51 WHIP (yeah, that's not a typo) and a *lgERA of 4.39. I'm not even going to bother looking at his BABIP, but I'm sure that's terrible as well. Wins/Losses and ERA are your typical 'luck' statistics. You can't even take them seriously. Oh and just in the interest of accuracy, the Giants score nearly 5 runs a game for Lowry. Thats WELL above league average. With those numbers in the NL West? You can make your own conclusion. But, I'll just say that Noah Lowry blows.

Zito and Lowry are both awful.

idk my bff Jill? props.

It's scheduled to play at the Venice Film Festival later this month so reviews will be popping up real soon. Well, here's the first, Devin from CHUD gives his initial thoughts here: http://chud.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103829 The best comment he makes is here: "The movie is 2 hours and 40 minutes, so I assume it's Dominik's cut. Unless his was like 3 and a half."

Is the trailer showing up? I know it has been delayed for over a year now but I'm very excited to see the quintessential American genre make a comeback with this movie, 3:10 to Yuma, and No Country For Old Men, all getting released this Fall. NCFOM should be great, but I wouldn't go in expecting a full-on western. It's more Thriller/Suspense with some western elements and ideology mixed in. McCarthy does a great job combining them, and it sounds like the Coen's did the same. I do agree, though, it's great to see such a lively comeback in, what was, a dying genre.

I read the book. I'd say your expectations should be through the roof if the stories are true that Andrew Dominick and Brad Pitt won the creative war with the studio. That trailer certainly suggests they did. Best Actor/Supporting Actor nods for Affleck and Pitt are pretty possible, almost likely. Early reviews from credible sources (not 18-24 mall-goers cherry picked out of their shopping at Hot Topic to see a nearly 3 hour character study) say the movie is a masterpiece.

Is that you JJ? BEWARE THERE IS A SMALL CURSE....s word at about 40 secs. I hate that man.

Gary Oldman

He'll be fine. Everybody struggles. Relax.

Seriously, is no one watching this? It's excellent TV. I plead with you to give it a chance.

The Yankees have a lot of young talent [Hughes, Clippard, et all] being developed and always have the pocketbook to bring in another starter if needed. You can't teach a guy how to close a game, though. Also, for the record, the Yankees officially say he is going to be a starter, right? Yet, in late July they moved him to the pen down in Scranton. What does that tell you? They moved him to the bullpen to get SOME use out of him before he reached his innings cap.What are you talking about? He was in Scranton. Did I say he wasn't in Scranton? They weren't just going to pop him up out of AAA and move him into the bullpen in the big leagues after starting the entire season. He needed to get his feet wet to see if he could do it (re: warming up, only pitching an inning or two, etc). It's not like they moved him to AAA and then said "Hey, look at that! That Jober Chamberleen is doing good at AAA in relief". It was planned the whole time. They needed to stop him from starting so he wouldn't reach his inning cap, otherwise he couldn't help the big league team.

The difference between the two is that Zumaya has an "awfully exertive" delivery according to various scouting reports and has a trouble repeating it as he gets tired (deep into games). Chamberlain is the opposite of this. His delivery is very smooth and he nearly hits triple digits late into his starts. Zumaya has slightly worse control, but a slightly better fastball (about 2-3 MPH when both are relievers). Chamberlain also has a better third pitch, which is usually the key when it comes to the 2nd-4th turns through a lineup. Zumaya is a more effective reliever, whereas Chamberlain is a more effective starter. Rivera [a former SS, btw] was also brought up as a starter throwing 96-97 MPH. He had his cutter, two seamer, four seamer, and a slider. He had a couple of decent starts and a couple of mediocre starts [5-3 5+ ERA]. The Yankees put him in the pen to set up Wetteland and found lightening in a bottle. When Wetteland left in '97, the obvious decision was to move Mo into the closer role and the rest of his fabled success is history. Rivera was not nearly as heralded a prospect as Joba Chamberlain. Chamberlain is at another level. What happens to failed starting pitchers? They go to the bullpen. See: Eric Gagne and Mariano Rivera. Look, it's not like there's no precedent here. Johan Santana turned out fine last I checked. I understand what the Yankee plans were for him HOWEVER - what does Chamberlain throw? 96-97 MPH? His pitches are what? Fastball and slider? What's he doing now? Setting up a Mariano Rivera that could very well retire? It doesn't really matter that Torre thinks he'll only bring Chamberlain in to start an inning or Cashman thinks Chamberlain will be a #3 or #4 starter - if his value remains in the setup role or develops into the closer role, that's where he is going to be. What has more value: someone pitching to a 3 ERA as a starter or someone who pitches to a 2 ERA as a closer? It's a simple answer. Chamberlain IS NOT a 3 or 4 starter. He is an ACE. Period. I will offer one caveat, the ONLY WAY Chamberlain remains in the bullpen is if Mariano Rivera is not a Yankee next year. The Yankees have a lot of young talent [Hughes, Clippard, et all] being developed and always have the pocketbook to bring in another starter if needed. You can't teach a guy how to close a game, though. Also, for the record, the Yankees officially say he is going to be a starter, right? Yet, in late July they moved him to the pen down in Scranton. What does that tell you? They moved him to the bullpen to get SOME use out of him before he reached his innings cap. And let's nip the Papelbon comparison right now. Papelbon never got close to Joba Chamberlains prospect ranking.

The difference between the two is that Zumaya has an "awfully exertive" delivery according to various scouting reports and has a trouble repeating it as he gets tired (deep into games). Chamberlain is the opposite of this. His delivery is very smooth and he nearly hits triple digits late into his starts. Zumaya has slightly worse control, but a slightly better fastball (about 2-3 MPH when both are relievers). Chamberlain also has a better third pitch, which is usually the key when it comes to the 2nd-4th turns through a lineup. Zumaya is a more effective reliever, whereas Chamberlain is a more effective starter. They do have similarities though.

Papelbon could not sustain his command and stuff over 7 innings, Not true. Papelbon's turn to the bullpen was not made because of an inability to start, it started because he was nearing in on his combined max IP in 2005 while in the bigs so he was sent to the pen (I expect this same type of plan to be used for Clay as they are in very similar circumstances) and then once in the bullpen, he was simply too dominant and effective to be taken out. Nothing to do with this supposed inability to sustain his 'command and stuff over 7 innings'. Not what I'm saying. I know that's why he was moved to the bullpen. The reason he was not considered an elite starting pitcher prospect was because he couldn't sustain it for 7 IP. Papelbon wasn't heralded like Phil Hughes, Homer Bailey or even Francisco Liriano, and that was the reason. Papelbon is hitting 97 on the gun with ease as the closer, I believe there was some doubt he could replicate that as a starter. And, hell, if he could, then the Red Sox are asshats. He needs to be pitching 200 innings a year. My point is that where as Papelbon uses the bullpen to his advantage by really dialing up his stuff for that one inning, Chamberlain appears to have no noticeable difference. He still sits exactly the same as he did velocity-wise. Trust, I'm taking nothing away from Papelbon. He is fantastic. But, he would not be the same as a starter. There's a reason he wasn't a top 10 prospect. He is absolutely perfect in his role and has been flat-out incredible. Point taken, I get what you mean. That said, with that logic applied; wouldn't Joba only averaging ~ >6 IP per start in his first year of pro ball something of a concern (not insinuating anything either way) when it comes to him being a definite starter? Chamberlain, as with most prospects, is on a strict pitch count. If he gets anywhere near 100 pitches he gets yanked. He only averages 6 IP start because he uses a lot of pitches per batter. If you look at his K/9 rates, they're absolutely ridiculous. I think he's at something like 15 K/9 for the year. While that's all fine and dandy because it looks nice, that means he's throwing an awful lot of pitches. It really doesn't have anything to do with his stuff deteriorating. In fact, in his last AAA start (I believe it was his last) he was hitting 97 on the gun in the 7th inning. The concern is that he throws a lot of pitches, almost missing too many bats, instead of letting them put the ball in play. You'll also see later in the year the top-tier prospects start getting shut down early. The organizations will only let them throw 5 IP per start so that they don't reach their inning cap. I'm not 100% certain I'm reading you post correctly though.

Is he definitely going to be a reliever and not a starter going forward? Same story as Pappelbon. Too valuable in the pen. But - we'll see. It's not the same story as Papelbon at all. Papelbon was a B+ prospect. Joba Chamberlain is the second best pitching prospect in baseball at this moment, and probably has the highest upside of anyone outside Homer Bailey (ugh). Is Joba is #2 ahead of Hughes, Gallardo, Lincecum, Garza, Miller, Kershaw, Morales, Adenhart, etc? I don't believe that for a second... and I like Joba alot A bad stint in the majors gives Bailey a boot from even consideration? Ramp: Why would I include those guys? They've already logged considerable MLB innings and are going to stay there. Though I would rank him above everyone that you just said not including Hughes, Gallardo and Lincecum. Kershaw is very, very close. I put Buchholz as #1. He's a surefire #2 starter. Joba is right behind, but both he and Bailey have considerably higher upsides than Buchholz. Junior: Bailey has had a bad year, not just a stint in the majors. I haven't checked recently, but last I had he had given up .5 BB/IP. I've also heard rumors that he has lost quite a bit of velocity as well. Checking his numbers now it appears he has LESS THAN A K per IP. That's not good. Something's not right with him. Don't let the 3.07 ERA fool you. He's still an elite prospect, but he's not quite on those other guys level right now. If he fixes himself he has as high an upside as anyone. When looking at prospects, atleast for me, whoever appeared in BA at the beginning of the year is a prospect for the entire season even if they make 30 starts. I gotcha. In that case, Chamberlain would not be my #2 prospect.

Papelbon could not sustain his command and stuff over 7 innings, Not true. Papelbon's turn to the bullpen was not made because of an inability to start, it started because he was nearing in on his combined max IP in 2005 while in the bigs so he was sent to the pen (I expect this same type of plan to be used for Clay as they are in very similar circumstances) and then once in the bullpen, he was simply too dominant and effective to be taken out. Nothing to do with this supposed inability to sustain his 'command and stuff over 7 innings'. Not what I'm saying. I know that's why he was moved to the bullpen. The reason he was not considered an elite starting pitcher prospect was because he couldn't sustain it for 7 IP. Papelbon wasn't heralded like Phil Hughes, Homer Bailey or even Francisco Liriano, and that was the reason. Papelbon is hitting 97 on the gun with ease as the closer, I believe there was some doubt he could replicate that as a starter. And, hell, if he could, then the Red Sox are asshats. He needs to be pitching 200 innings a year. My point is that where as Papelbon uses the bullpen to his advantage by really dialing up his stuff for that one inning, Chamberlain appears to have no noticeable difference. He still sits exactly the same as he did velocity-wise. Trust, I'm taking nothing away from Papelbon. He is fantastic. But, he would not be the same as a starter. There's a reason he wasn't a top 10 prospect. He is absolutely perfect in his role and has been flat-out incredible.

Is he definitely going to be a reliever and not a starter going forward? Same story as Pappelbon. Too valuable in the pen. But - we'll see. It's not the same story as Papelbon at all. Papelbon was a B+ prospect. Joba Chamberlain is the second best pitching prospect in baseball at this moment, and probably has the highest upside of anyone outside Homer Bailey (ugh). Is Joba is #2 ahead of Hughes, Gallardo, Lincecum, Garza, Miller, Kershaw, Morales, Adenhart, etc? I don't believe that for a second... and I like Joba alot A bad stint in the majors gives Bailey a boot from even consideration? Ramp: Why would I include those guys? They've already logged considerable MLB innings and are going to stay there. Though I would rank him above everyone that you just said not including Hughes, Gallardo and Lincecum. Kershaw is very, very close. I put Buchholz as #1. He's a surefire #2 starter. Joba is right behind, but both he and Bailey have considerably higher upsides than Buchholz. Junior: Bailey has had a bad year, not just a stint in the majors. I haven't checked recently, but last I had he had given up .5 BB/IP. I've also heard rumors that he has lost quite a bit of velocity as well. Checking his numbers now it appears he has LESS THAN A K per IP. That's not good. Something's not right with him. Don't let the 3.07 ERA fool you. He's still an elite prospect, but he's not quite on those other guys level right now. If he fixes himself he has as high an upside as anyone.

...I really need to calm down, btw.

Is he definitely going to be a reliever and not a starter going forward? Same story as Pappelbon. Too valuable in the pen. But - we'll see. It's not the same story as Papelbon at all. Papelbon was a B+ prospect. Joba Chamberlain is the second best pitching prospect in baseball at this moment, and probably has the highest upside of anyone outside Homer Bailey (ugh). I KNEW Yankees fans were going to start this crap with him being too valuable to take out of the bullpen. I was praying it wouldn't come to this just so the fans don't start this crap all offseason and next season long. Chamberlain IS a starter. He will BE a starter. This isn't a case where he has 1 great pitch and must be stashed into the bullpen. He has starter stuff, he will be a starter. He is a reliever right now to fill a need, but also to slow his innings down. He is almost at his limit, in fact, another 5 starts in AAA and he would've been done for the year. Papelbon could not sustain his command and stuff over 7 innings, Joba Chamberlain has been at 99 on the gun in the 7th inning of his starts. Chamberlain has 2 plus-plus pitches and 2 developing plus pitches. Brian Cashman has repeated again and again Joba Chamberlain WILL be a starter next year. There is no dispute here. You can find a bullpen arm to get you a few outs. It's much more valuable for someone of Joba's caliber to be pitching 200 innings a year rather than 50-60. Stop the insanity. He is not Mariano Rivera's heir. Humberto Sanchez, Mark Melancon or Christian Garcia will be the closer for the Yankees long term if someone outside of the organization is not brought in.

Sorry, I guess I'm not ready to accept two guys having sex as one of the greatest sex scenes of all time. 21st century or not. Why? It is, by very definition, a 'sex scene'. Should I deem two asian people having sex not a sex scene just because they're different than me? A 'sex scene' is a 'sex scene' no matter who is doing the sexing. If it was two animated Pandas going at it hardcore complete with cherries, whip cream and whips, I don't think it makes a damn difference. It's a sex scene, hence it qualifies. So if it's well done and some people consider it to be great, it's great. It doesn't have to be something that turns you on. Animated Pandas nor Gay Cowboys personally get me going, but I'd consider Brokeback Mountain a great sex scene.

Brokeback Mountain?! Excuse me while I go throw up. Insecure much? Honestly, it's the 21st century people. Wake up. I found #2 to be almost unbearable, btw. I don't think it has any place on the list.

He was not released, yankees will not let him go without a trade due to the 26 million dollar posting fee they had to pay his japanese leagues team to nogotiate with him. that's hilarious. and why i thought his contract was so high. i guess 5 yrs/$20M isn't so bad for a team with some actual dough. but just great stuff that the yankees wasted that much on the guy. i'm sure his former japanese team is laughing. Actually, his Japanese team probably hope he flops and comes back ASAP. A free 26 million for them.

Meanwhile Joba Chamberlain is throwing gasolina outta the Yanks pen. That kid is awsome. Have you seen him? Holy crap. 100 MPH moving fastball that he can throw wherever he wants and a vicious 90 MPH slider. He's incredible.

5-1 sorry, i meant in the division over the yankees 13 I think wow, i dont think the yankees have ever come back from that far in my lifetime. gotta happen one year. They had a 14.5 game lead actually.