Soxbadger

Joe Schobert, doesn't have top end measurables but makes a ton of plays.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 25, 2016 -> 12:11 PM) An opinion held by Patriots fans, Michigan fans and virtually nobody else. What about a Bears and Wisconsin fan? At least Brady didnt back down to Goodell.

Really strange season for Wisconsin. And there cant be a person in the world who would have predicted that Vitto Brown would be a guy that you would feel confident about shooting a three.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 02:14 PM) I feel like Laroche at this point is done with it and wants it over with You cant walk something like this back. He created a fire storm, the time for rational was at the start. I have no inside information, but Im guessing Laroche thought his "ultimatum" would work, he thought getting the Sox star Sale on his side would change things. The Sox dug in and it became national news. Now a "family first" guy has a chance of being exposed for making things up. Its the only thing to me that seems to make any sense.

QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 02:10 PM) That was a great letter by LaRoche I get a weird vibe from it. The tone of the letter does not seem to fit way certain teammates are freaking out about it. Maybe its just me.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 18, 2016 -> 11:58 AM) See what Hahn and Robin say. They have been awfully quiet. Doesn't Hahn negotiate contracts? It's funny you are trying to nail me into a wall. What if it is in his contract? Are you going to admit KW was out of bounds? If its in his contract then absolutely the Sox are at fault. But if it was in his contract we wouldnt be having this conversation because the Sox would have unilaterally breached.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 05:26 PM) Well I'm working off the assumption that neither party really cares to enforce the contract at this point. Perhaps releasing or voiding the contract is the easier thing to do procedurally. The Sox might have chimps for attorneys or they might have great attorneys, but if they try to enforce their rights to LaRoche through the end of this year, they don't know baseball. Laroche retired. He could have asked for a release. I honestly have no clue what is going on, but my guess is that LaRoche let his ego get the best of him and instead of thinking it through, he made a rash decision. He probably thought if he threatened retirement they would cave, when they didnt, he took his ball and went home. I get why the Sox would consider releasing him, but it just seems like that is an option you discuss before you retire.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 05:11 PM) My guess is he retires, then unretires and signs elsewhere. I don't think either party would be too disappointed with that result. I dont know the contract but my guess that unless the Sox have chimps for attorneys there should be a clause that states they have his rights through the end of the contract (even if he retires) so they would have to release him from the contract. Otherwise any guy who doesnt like his contract could just "retire" and then go sign somewhere else.

QUOTE (Condor13 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 05:00 PM) From what I've read it was verbally agreed upon and known by all, hence the kid was with the team all last year. The verbal agreement is just as binding as his contract, especially since they did multuple things to accommodate his son last year. I have a feeling the sox would lose the case or it would be very difficult case to decide. Not really. They are sophisticated parties that were both represented by attorneys if it was a condition to his employment, it should have been in writing. If it really was agreed to by all, why was it not in writing? I cant imagine that a multi-million dollar agreement does not have a merger/integration clause. And if it does, then the entire point of having the written agreement is so that neither party can come back later and say that there were other terms to the agreement. I dont know the facts, I havent seen the contract, but I would rather be on the Sox side then Laroche's (from a legal standpoint). If the Sox materially breached his contract, why would he not sue for breach instead of retire? The fact he retired seems to suggest that he had no legal ground to stand on.

QUOTE (Condor13 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 03:21 PM) Just saw that the mlbpa will most likely file a grievance against the sox bc having his son with him was a condition for him to sign with the sox. This should be an easy case, either it is in the contract or its not. Unless this is some sort of bizarro world where they had junior high school students drafting the contract there will be something called a integration/merger clause so either its in the contract or its not. Id be willing to bet its not in the contract so this wont go far.

Had Yale in my seed pool, but couldnt pull the trigger in regular brackets,

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 03:46 PM) I think the wall street costs, etc, are something that Trump would rail on Hillary to the tee and people have a general distaste for wall street, etc. He'll hit on the moderate issues. I never thought I'd say this (even a week ago) but I see more momentum and signs for him actually being president than I ever did before. Nevada gave more reason for that where Trump really grew his overall pull (as well). The old theory was everyone jumping off the falling candidates was going to gravitate to non Trump candidates, but the reality hasn't been so set and as I pointed out previously, as he continues to build momentum more of those "swing" voters or potential non-trump voters will either not vote in the primary (because they realize Trump has already won) or turn their vote to Trump. And those non-primary voting conservatives who, as pissed off as they are with Trump, are not going to sit back and vote for Hillary or Bernie. They republicans are livid with the democrats and the turnouts in the primary are evidence for how irate and motivated the actual base is (and this more than anything should be what really gets the DNC worried), the vote and turnout will ultimately be their for the republican and as people go out, Trump is going to do what he can to bring back in those anti-trump conservatives by throwing him a more experienced VP candidate (imo). Lets just hypothetically say it is Kasich or even Rubio, do you really think those people are going to vote independent or democrat vs. voting for a Trump / Rubio or Kasich ticket? Would Rubio or Kasich turn down the VP bid, I don't think so. The problem for GOP is that it isnt enough to just get GOP votes, they need to siphon Democrat votes. The best way to do this was to take advantage of Democrat ambivalence towards their candidates. The problem with Trump being so polarizing is that when you polarize you motivate the opposition. Its not enough just to get higher Republican turnout, because Trump will likely mean higher democrat turnout. You cant compare Hillary/Sanders turnout because a lot of Democrats simply dont care about those 2. But if its Trump versus either one of them, I doubt a lot of Democrats will be sitting at home.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 03:09 PM) Conversely, she'll come off as the stiff, boring, entrenched politician that she is (an image she can't shake and is a problem even with liberal voters) while Trump continues to beat the more fun, outgoing, anti-establishment drum, a drum that is resonating despite all the dumb stuff he says. Either way, it'll be fun to watch. I still think if a lot of Dems just say screw it and don't vote because they don't like Trump or Clinton, he's got a shot. He's not going to pull a lot of people from the left, but he'll attract some undecideds and it's pretty clear something about him is getting voters interested and out there voting. And it's not just "he says racist s***." Hate messages are very attractive, a lot of politicians have historically won on the "Its not your fault its someone else's" message. I think its impossible to predict what will happen if he actually goes to the general election. There are some people right now voting for Trump to try and weaken the GOP, especially the religious right. That being said, if Trump continues with hate rhetoric I hope that Democrats will all vote against him. Not as an endorsement of the Democrat candidate but as a rebuke of Trump.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:39 PM) She's going up against a complete unknown. He could say literally anything at any time. Whether she gets flustered or not is beside the point. I want to see her reaction when he accuses her of not being able to control her own house, let alone the country, etc. If Trump is smart he doesnt go down those roads at all. 2 failed marriages isnt exactly a solid foundation. Trump was married to Ivana when he started an extramarital affair with Marla. And lets be honest, this whole sideshow isnt good for anyone even if it means that candidates I like less wont have a chance.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 03:23 PM) I knew the first girl very well. There's no way she was lying about it. In fact, at the time she told me about it, she still thought she was pregnant. It took two OTC pregnancy tests and a visit to a non-PP clinic to convince her that she wasn't. The second girl I didn't know very well. Can't speak to her motives. To me this seems to suggest that she may have been under a lot of stress, and in situations like that it is possible that people do not accurately remember the events that took place. I have never met anyone who wants more abortions or who wants other people to get abortions, I have only met people who want the option available. It is entirely possible that it occurred, I just believe it is extremely unlikely. But even for the sake of argument, if i was to 100% believe it happened, I would still believe that it was an isolated individual. PP discusses a variety of options that include adoptions and keeping the child.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 03:13 PM) Just to be clear, the "4 days after missed period" was only the first girl. She was very naive about a bunch of things and really thought she was pregnant. The second woman knew she wasn't pregnant. Their motive to lie is pretty much everybody's #1 motive to lie: $$$. I'd imagine there's a nice profit on an abortion if you can charge somebody for one and not actually have to do one. So now you are saying that PP and their doctors are fraudulently stating that people need abortions when they really dont? Come on man. Look at your statement, what is more likely: 1) A girl who is scared/worried creates a lie because she is scared/worried, maybe thinks she can make money off of it; 2) A company is just flat out lying, creating fraudulent test result, so that they can do unnecessary procedures, so that they can make money, which if they are caught would end the Dr's career. And so now Im somewhat confused. If the second person knew she wasnt pregnant, why was she going to PP to get a blood pregnancy test?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:55 PM) Yet you are assuming that these two girls are lying and yet somehow it's impossible that PP employees would lie. These girls, at least the first one, wouldn't necessarily have known ANY of the facts you've just presented. I also don't get where you're going with the "false positive" bit. I don't think they were even given real tests. Either that or just lied to about the test results. I am not assuming anything. I am basing my opinion on the facts that you have presented to me. Now I guess its possible that you are lying, but I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you were just merely parroting what 2 other people told you. The reason I brought up "false positive" is that your original post said they were told they were pregnant. That means they were given a blood test and told that the blood test was positive. After they were told it was positive, they were then told they needed to get an abortion asap. You said that this happened 4 days after she missed her period. You said that this same thing happened to 2 different people. It's just unclear what the motive for the PP people to lie. In my experience even the most adamant supporters of baby killing arent out there actively trying to convince other people to kill babies, they are just saying "I want the right to do it." Conversely people who are anti-baby killing are the ones who are trying to tell other people what they can or can not do. So after examining the facts, I believe that it is more likely that those 2 girls created a fictitious event. For what reason? I dont know, I can definitely speculate though. (edit) In terms of the actionable statement. I am not sure what you are saying. Medical Mal requires certain elements to be met. One of them is damages. There is no liability if there is no damage.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:46 PM) This sounds like some serious fraud/malpractice. I hope authorities were contacted. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:48 PM) I don't think any criminal charges got filed. I'm guessing there was some sort of settlement though, because at some point both started refusing to discuss the matter at all to anybody. Malpractice requires damage. What was their damage? It would be like saying I was told I had cancer, I went to get chemo and they found out I didnt. How is that actionable? The answer is, its not. The reason they stopped talking about it is because they made it up. The simplest answer is generally the right answer. I think that's occam's razer.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:43 PM) First one had no agenda, actually thought she was pregnant and scared s***less. Second one had an agenda based on the first one's story. If you're selling a fake abortion, it doesn't really matter if it's ASAP and/or after the 5th week, does it? Not plausible to you, because you know a ton of things about pregnancy and abortion that a 20-year old woman who's just been 4 days late for her period for the first time in her life probably doesn't know. I know that people lie. And I know that you wouldnt get a false positive after 4 days of missing your period. You are supposed to wait 7 days minimum, because you would always get a negative under 7 days. So again, what is more likely. http://contraception.about.com/od/contrace...p/bloodtest.htm I believe science over people. People tend to lie. Not trying to be a jerk, but Im pretty positive that If I pressed these 2 girls, the evidence would support that there is no possible way they had the exact same experience. The part that gives it away is the false positive.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:23 PM) Personally, no, but I have two female friends who have, got told they were pregnant (when they weren't) and told they needed to have an abortion ASAP before anybody found out they were pregnant because that would ruin their lives. That seems implausible. From personal experience I know that they go over all options (including adoption). https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/pre...w-what/adoption There is a reason why hearsay testimony is inadmissible in a court, its because its unreliable. Just look at the facts that were told to you 1) they were told they were pregnant and 2) they were told they needed an abortion asap. Abortions are not performed ASAP, abortions are almost always performed after the 5th week of pregnancy. At that point a false positive (as opposed to a false negative) is extremely unlikely because a false positive requires hcg level to be above a certain level. False negatives are common, false positives are extremely rare (i think its something like 1%). So the chances that you have 2 friends who both had false positives and were both told incorrect medical information is almost nil. It seems more that these 2 individuals have an agenda and have decided to sensationalize their experience.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 02:20 PM) Any bulls*** from Kasich is miniscule compared to the constant bulls*** spewed by PP. Going to assume youve never been to planned parenthood.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 12:54 PM) I'm sure she would hope she has earned enough trust for you to allow her to make her own adult decisions (and by their nature, her own adult mistakes). Like I said its her decision. But, just because she is 17 (or even 18) doesnt mean that she will make the best decisions. Mistakes are fine, everyone makes them and people hopefully learn from them. But at the same time, there has to be some rational argument as to why there was some value in making a decision that could be later classified as a mistake. Its one thing signing up to take guitar lessons to find out you dont really like guitar, its another to go out with a 25 year old. She is too young to understand, but I joke with her and tell her, throwing a temper tantrum will never get me to change my mind, if anything it will just cement my decision. But if she makes a compelling argument I just may reconsider. I just dont really see what the great argument would be for a HS girl dating someone who is 25.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 11:34 AM) Seriously though...considering the types of guys that are out there, I think you guys are approaching this incredibly poorly. Look at Joe, and then consider your daughter dating the 19 year old college kid with a fascination with death metal and self mutilation. You're going to make that decision based on age? Age is just 1 of many reasons why I would not approve. Ultimately it would be her choice, I just would hope by the time that she is 17, I have earned enough trust that she will believe me when I suggest that she not make the choice to date those people.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 10:56 AM) Jason, I think in general, you're suspicions are probably accurate...but, you wouldn't give the person an opportunity to prove you wrong? I wouldnt right then. She's not even done with HS let alone college. I feel like if someone was in college and wanted to date my daughter in HS they would have to have been grandfathered in (IE they were both in HS when they started dating). That being said, there is no way I am going to consider it when shes in HS and hes 25. Maybe when shes done with college I would revisit the issue.

Anyone have 2 tickets? My gf is a Heat fan and I was thinking of taking her. There are a bunch on stubhub etc, but figured Id rather give someone on Soxtalk the money.