greg775

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 17, 2013 -> 06:46 PM) http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rticle_63066500 Should be interesting to see if Boston ultimately goes nuts and overpays. 70 million? How many years? Four? No way this guy just gets 10 mill a year.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Oct 17, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) I really don't think an 18+ win improvement is out of the question. I'm not counting on it, but I think it can be done. Signing McCann and Abreu could easily give us a 8 win improvement by themselves. Add in the fact that having another year of development out of Quintana, Santiago, Garcia and Viciedo could add a couple more. We were in a lot of games this year and our record could have easily been better than it was. We played 60 one run games and 23 extra inning games. Our record in those? 24-36 and 8-15 respectively. The additional players/development and an improvement in our hard to explain poor fielding from this year could possibly flip those numbers around. If that happens, we are a lot closer than people realize. Sox have so much work to do on the roster, on the field (defense wins games) and regarding team chemistry/attitude. Right now we are the patsies of the Central Division. Sox routinely get mopped up by Detroit, Cleveland and KC and even have problems with Minnesota. Barring the changes to 5-6 lineup spots that many of us want, this doesn't figure to change. I say odds of Sox flirting with .500 after this year's disaster are very slim. This isn't the NFL.

So Alexander a lock to Kansas because of Jerrance Howard and his girlfriend playing for Kansas women's team? Will he be academically eligible? Anybody know? Where will the Okafor/Jones package wind up? It seems to me if they really are going to go to school together, the only possiblilities are Duke and/or Kansas. Kentucky has a top PG coming in, meaning no way Tyus Jones goes there. Baylor is Baylor. They don't win these type of package recruiting battles for kids outside of the state of Texas. I don't see why Okafor would want to go to Duke, being a Chicago kid. I could see why Jones would want to run the show at Duke. That leaves Kansas. Okafor would be the latest big man to rule at Kansas and Jones would also start from Day One. Since Self is kind of a likeable guy to recruits, and Howard is Mr. Illinois, does Kansas win this package by default? Or do these 2 kids eventually decide against the package deal, like so many recruits do? Package deals rarely come to fruition.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 17, 2013 -> 12:24 AM) Think about this for a second is it really true that consistently winning could switch Chicago to a Sox town? The Cubs haven't won s*** in over 100 years. Their fan base doesn't care about winning. They have done what I wish every baseball franchise could pull off, making it seem fun to go to a MLB baseball game no matter the outcome. As Sox fans we take pride often times in not supporting a terrible team. Cub fans, it could be argued, are better "baseball" fans because 2 million of them come out to watch baseball, not just watch their team when it is winning. The Sox should have made a better dent by having the newer modern ball park, but failed because of the too steep upper deck and ball-mall anti-marketing. The Sox blew it in two ways, like you said. One, being the ballpark. You are right. It was a feeble attempt at a brand new park. It's OK now, still nothing special. No. 2, of course, is blowing it after 2005. There's no way we could blow the momentum we had as a franchise, right? Well the Sox completely blew it and less than 10 years later we have perhaps the worst franchise in baseball except for Houston and Miami. They should have ridden the WS title to many divisional titles and thus actually would be known as the "winning" team in the Windy City. Blown opportunity. Arguably, considering all the teams in baseball and all the teams that do it right, we may never get that opportunity to rule the city again.It's going to be very hard to build this thing back up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 16, 2013 -> 05:39 PM) Does anyone want to throw out a legit guess at Salty's contract? If he's talking 3/$30 or more, then that could certainly be worth turning down a qualifying offer. I have a sneaky feeling the Sox are going to go the rebuilding route and not pay big bucks for any of these guys, who all have some flaws. If McCann is 30, that's too old to throw 100 million at I'm guessing and if Salty gets 5-6 years, Sox will certainly pass on that too IMO. I'd suspect if Grandy doesn't want to break the bank, he might be a guy they sign. Same with Abreu if he doesn't want astronomical dollars or if nobody is willing to give him astronomical years/dollars. I could picture the Sox giving Phegley a full season. And now that I think of it, I could see the Kepp/Gillaspie platoon happening. Glad I dropped my automatic renewal on mlb.com.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 16, 2013 -> 03:42 AM) He has a great personality and makes me laugh so I'm ok with his results based on that. Would you rather have some boring person in his shoes where no one is interested to even tune in to listen to them speak? At least he's entertaining. I would give him an A minus. I think he shows a good personality only once a year, at the Washington correspondents dinner. Otherwise, he's not that funny.

This might be the wrong thread. If you want to make it its own post go ahead. Call it Obama approval rating: My question is: How do you rate Obama as a President? I truly would say he's a huge failure and I voted for him one of the two times. I think he deserves a D to D-minus, I truly do. Do u agree? I do think Romney would have been an F and McCain a D-minus if that's any consolation.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 15, 2013 -> 01:20 AM) The article says he mumbled, not that he yelled, or at least one of the articles I found said that. He was convicted of murder 2 because the other guy actually started the whole incident. He didn't just randomly stab some dude. The one I read said one guy had him pinned then he stabbed him. Had he not overreacted, it probably would have just been a barfight. Sad if this guy had no prior violent tendencies, but the fact he stabbed a guy to death I would think would be minimum of 24 years, not 12.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 09:50 PM) He was a friend of a friend I met a few times. I never really liked that crowd and hadn't seen him for a couple of years prior to that murder. Interesting in your link how he yelled at the judge at sentencing. The judge told him if he keeps it up he'd re-think the 12 years and give him more. I think the friend of the friend got off pretty light. 12 years and he killed a guy. Sounds like a tragic case all around. I'd think he'd get more than that, though. Maybe 30 years. In this day and age, 12 years isn't that many in a life of a 27-year old. I could see him getting 12 if he hit him with a bar glass or something and by fluke he died, but a stabbing? 12 years is pretty thin I think.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 09:10 PM) Would be interesting to see how Jenks responds to this because he is more economically driven, and I presume the main reason for not going for the conviction is that economically it makes no sense to spend thousands of tax payer dollars on a verdict that is redundant. So Ill put it back in your hands. Should the govt spend tax payer dollars on court cases that are redundant (Ie the convict is already going to be executed/life in jail)? My answer is that depends on what you believe the justice system is built for. I do not believe its built for vengeance, or at least I hope that its not. I want to believe that it is built as a deterrent and that the hope is that no one will ever break the law, and if they do we are forced to punish them, but not because it makes us feel good about doing it. So based on my belief, Id say if hes already being executed/life imprisonment, it probably doesnt make much sense to spend lots of time and money on another conviction, even if that means the victims family/friends wont get the closure that they want. We were all OK for him not going on trial for her murder. He already got what he deserved from the other cases. He actually got life in prison and they never even found the bodies of the 3 other girls he killed. Kudos to the jury. I doubt he'd be found guilty today. Also the parents of my friend weren't crazy about all the specifics of her horrible injuries delivered by the coward coming out at trial. However, they did feel bad til this day that he didn't have to fess up to the murder, feeling their daughter may not have gotten her day. The dad of my friend did want to kill the prick but never had a chance. the killer is one of those lowlifes that sneers at the victims families and acts like a macho piece of s*** that he thinks he is. Basically a guy who should have never been born. Or was "Born to Raise Hell" like I believe Richard Speck had written on his arm or something. In life if there's bad timing and we run into one of those mass murderer zeros it could be curtains for any one of us. So everybody was OK with the decision, which like you said, was primarily based on economy. He already was convicted. The cases of the other 3 girls were not separate; I think lumped all into one murder case.

I happen to think victims have a lot of rights. Family members are victims too. I had a best friend brutally murdered by a moron many years ago. Her case was never brought to trial because the murderer was given life for some other murders and they didn't see a need to try him for her case since he got life. He's still rotting in jail. But I like to believe her mom, her dad, her sister, me and those who knew her were also victims. Just because she's gone doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to have her murderer convicted and burned.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:30 PM) I presume she is, but it just would have misconstrued the point I was making. It doesnt matter if shes in jail or not, that should have no bearing or impact on how fast the trial is. Innocent until proven guilty. It has to mean something, and for me its something that I actually believe is worth fighting for. In a perfect world, how should her case be handled in your opinion? Let's say she truly is guilty (which she damn well appears to be 100 percent). Give me a date when she will be sentenced and when in a truly caring society she SHOULD be sentenced. Thank u.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:40 PM) I agree with you that we can make improvements. We still had the best judicial system 100 years ago and it didn't take 10 years and 2-3 appeals for someone to get sentenced. Now, that's a rarity, but it shouldn't happen. Amen, Jenks. I knew you were wise when I saw your name. As some may recall I love Bobby Jenks.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:20 PM) I agree emotionally with Greg here. If this lady admits to it and pleads guilty, get that life long cell ready for next week. There's no point in clogging up court dockets with a case like this. But, if she doesn't confess and/or wants to put up a defense of some kind (insanity probably), she has the right to do so and you have to respect the process. Greg, it's not like this lady is leaving a cell except to go to court. Edit: By the way, she should be taken out back and shot and/or subject to the gallows as soon as her guilt/confession is confirmed. This is precisely the type of heinous crime that deserves death, not life in prison. This lady killed an infant with a sledgehammer, and because the kid wasn't dead enough, she slit the kid's throat. She has no reason being on this earth anymore. I agree with a post, finally. QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:23 PM) What do you mean playing field for victims and their families? Weve spent 20,000 years creating a system where defendants are not put at a disadvantage, Im not about to screw that up because bad things happen. If shes guilty, shell go to jail. Maybe today, tomorrow or 2 years from now. People have b****ed at me in my line of work for years, dating back to when I was a kid working at a concession stand on a golf course. Now I can b**** about somebody else's line of work. I happen to think the court system is flawed. I also happen to think the medical profession is flawed. So let's fix it?? Nah, it has to stay this way forever. ... Why???? QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:39 PM) Do the victims have the right to hearing a complete accounting of the facts and evidence from the police as well? To be sure that the confession they're reading is one they should believe? Sure. I'm just saying in these type cases, do it quickly. Get her in court and convicted. These type of crimes are defining the world today's kids will be living in. These horrific crimes are becoming normal. This piece of s*** woman doesn't deserve a lot IMO.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 08:15 PM) We have the best judicial system in the world because even the most guilty are deserving of the same defense as the most innocent. /shrugs The last problem of any country is giving defendants too many rights. It just isnt a real issue. Are all u guys attorneys? So nothing can be improved in our judicial system?? It's perfect as it, with all these delays in cut and dried cases?? This is a family murder where EVERYONE agrees she is guilty including her. As a taxpayer I happen to be appalled at all the delays. Where are the rights for the gawddarn victims???? Tell me please.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 14, 2013 -> 09:06 PM) Just say it greg, you dont believe in due process. You know, there are many times that people were believed to have committed heinous crimes, and even said so under interrogation, and it turns out they didnt. Just ask the West Memphis 3 about that. Those kids were railroaded to death row simply for looking different and being outsiders, and they were interrogated until they admitted guilt. Im not saying this lady is innocent, she certainly looks like she is guilty as sin, but that doesnt mean we string her up in the town square and let her hang immediately. I'm just talking about this case. Nobody is suggesting she was coerced into making a statement she killed her grandchild. Why can't we change the system to put the alleged murderers at a disadvantage and not the victims' families? She can have a defense. Just do it on society's terms. Why waste time? We are talking about taking a sledgehammer to a f***ing baby. If you want a civilized society this s*** HAS TO STOP. I say change the system to give a better playing field for the victims and their families.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 10:39 PM) In this case, like all cases in the US, she is innocent until proven guilty. She is entitled to a strong defense in front of an unbiased judge or jury. I support our system, you reject it. We have appeals in this country because we have so many rights. I am fundamentally opposed to the taking away of rights. You have no problem with that. I can express outrage, horror, and empathy for this crime without demanding an immediate execution. There are countries around the world where that does happen, and none of them are where I would like to live. I disagree she is entitled to a strong defense in a case this cut and dried. She said she did it. Her relatives know she did it. I believe she is entitled to a defense but it should be at society's terms. i.e. A QUICK TRIAL. Let her team of lawyers scramble to get it together quickly, get her in court and get her sentenced. Look, what makes you believe our court system is working well?? You don't think it can be improved?? I happen to think so. In a case this blatant, this case where everybody is in agreement she did it, including the murderess, why can't we get her in the f***ing courtroom SOON and convicted?? You are saying I'm against America's system of justice. I am all for people getting their day in court. I am NOT FOR giving these people all sorts of time and the benefit of the doubt when THEY ARE GUILTY OF HEINOUS ACTS AND THERE IS NO CHANCE THEY ARE INNOCENT. NONE. Why do you think our current system of delay and zillions of appeals is the right way to conduct business in this decaying country of ours? You seem to accept this current system as the ONLY way we can and should do business. Why is that? I want improvements. And I want her in court soon so we can get on with the conviction.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 08:58 PM) The problem is that: You do not believe in innocent until proven guilty. You do not believe in an unbiased jury. Therefor you do not believe in the American system of justice. How can you simultaneously claim the system is flawed and demand killing people sooner without appeals? You do understand we have sentenced to death people who later are proven to be innocent? There is very strong evidence that at least one, and possibly more have been executed who were innocent? It is bad enough when innocent people have spent months, years, or even decades locked up for crimes that they did not commit. Once we have killed someone, it is impossible to go back and bring them back to life. I'm talking about this case. She said she did it. The family knows she did it. There is no conspiracy. Yes I want her stricken from the earth very soon, not having to wait years for a trial. If that makes me bad instead of the system, then I'm bad. I contend the system and our world can be very bad. I'm not wrong on this issue IMO. I'm not blaming you or criticizing you. I think the world would be a better place if there was more outrage against people like this woman when everybody knows she did it than people defending the legal system when somebody like me speaks out against this monster of a woman. That's just me.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 07:50 PM) Okay, thanks for the correction. http://truenewsusa.blogspot.com/2013/10/ba...awn-police.html This story (starting off with the pierogi/pirogi) and the "comments section," my God, you would believe the US was fraying at the seams looking at this...it's 100X worse than a typical yahoo story in that regard Really don't mean to hijack the thread, but these anonymous comments have got to go. How can a news organization allow them? I mean my god. How can civilized people write that kind of s***?!

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 03:37 PM) You are not the problem? Then you go on to admit you don't even need to hear the defense. Do you understand our entire justice system is based on innocent until proven guilty and being judged by an unbiased jury? How can you say you would not be a problem when you readily admit that she is guilty before the trial and that you have already formed a biased opinion? The problem is not me, it's getting these monsters tried in a quicker fashion. Unless the big, bad media is out to get her I think this woman is the problem. The article said: "Deno said in court that Giedrojc admitted in a video statement to beating the baby with a sledge hammer and slitting her throat." Cmon. If we can't get this woman convicted in a timely fashion, what good is society?? I think one of the problems today is people thinking somebody like me is the problem when I want quicker justice in these cases!! That's all.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 03:16 AM) WTF on the last two posts. There was a time human sacrifice was acceptable, people were thrown to the lions or had to fight to the death for sport. Towns had to have walls to keep muderous invaders away. Beheadings/hangings/torture were a public spectacle. Thousands of people would be impaled and left out in the open to intimidate the enemy. As a whole, we've become less violent, not more... Oh but a few sore losers in Kentucky is the sign of the apocolypse! I just think this is another example of "me first" America, is all. Everybody thinks they are so great and their kids are so great that they shouldn't have to lose a game. I remember one time in grade school, our all white team lost a game to an all black team in the title game of some tournament in inner city Chicago. Everybody thought our bus would get stoned, etc. We lost the game and I remember the handshake line more than the game. It was a great game and lots of handshakes and hugs between the two teams' players.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 13, 2013 -> 04:53 AM) I'm trying to make sense of some of the idiotic comments at one of the newspaper accounts in Chicago. The mother of the baby was African-American? If that's true, it puts another slant on this story...some were intimating that the grandmother was racist (from her upbringing in Europe) and didn't want a mixed ethnicity grandchild. Don't know if that's true or not...just speculation. Ugh. Hopefully that will rid the case of the insanity defense if she's prejudiced like that.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 12, 2013 -> 11:09 PM) And that is one of the problems with the system. People on juries that don't even bother with the evidence at trial. Do you realize that people like you on juries destroy the very foundation of our justice system and one reason it is, to use your words, MAJORLY FLAWED!!! The basic, most fundamental underpinning, is that all defendants receive a fair trial from an unbiased jury. Innocent until proven guilty. Only then would allowing the government to kill someone come close to being morally fair. No I am not the problem. She was found with the murder weapons. She said she did it. The relatives of this monster woman know she did it. Thus she is GUILTY at least in the court of Greg and I would make sure she didn't walk for this act. I seriously don't know if I've ever heard of a worse crime than this one and I feel so badly for the family of the baby.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 12, 2013 -> 10:43 AM) By definition, we usually consider such an act to be that of only the mentally ill or criminally insane. Surely, a psychologist will explain her actions or frame of mind and link it to something from her family past, World War II, SOMETHING...does anyone doubt this? After all, that's the defense attorney's job. And therein lies the problem. If she wasn't or right mind/thought (which nobody who would commit such an act COULD be), then how can she be 100% accountable in the current system? I wish I was on the jury because she wouldn't be found insane. She'd be found convicted and she'd be giving up her life. Or there'd be a retrial cause I wouldn't budge.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 12, 2013 -> 03:16 PM) Fortunately if the MAJORLY FLAWED system fails, we can just exhume the body, revive them, and the mistakes are corrected. If some of you aren't appalled by the fact these cut and dried cases take FOREVER to settle then we agree to disagree. I am so appalled by a grandmother taking a sledgehammer to a f***ing baby that I want her gone. Yes I do. And I'm sure she'll be found mentally insane. Yeah right!!! If she had shown any signs of insanity I'm sure dad would have left the baby with this piece of s***, devil. Our country is rotting so fast and there's nothing any of us can do about it ... AND WE AS A SOCIETY DESERVE WHAT HAPPENS TO US.Our country is one big piece of political correctness and we've let it become that way. A sledgehammer to a baby???? Really???