Y2HH

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 09:09 PM) Again, you still haven't given a reason why that won't happen anyway, or any way by which the every 3 month new bailout scheme has a way out. It probably will happen anyway, but they've invested this much into saving it, they can't just stop now or the losses compound. Well, they can stop now -- but they'd look like "bad guys" in the eyes of the world.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 05:05 PM) Unfortunately that's not the question at hand. The question is whether you would take a walk over swinging at a very hittable pitch just in or off the plate with a runner on third and one or two outs. No one is espousing swinging wildly at s***ty pitches. Not sure where you got that idea from his comments. Yea, not sure what he's talking about either, since nobody posted anything remotely close to what he just went on a tirade about.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 03:53 PM) So what is the end game? Aside from default and/or dropping the Euro, what is the end game? Another round of austerity measures in 6 months in exchange for another debtor haircut will lead to...another round of austerity measures in 6 months in exchange for a debtor haircut, which will lead to...another round of austerity measures in 6 months in exchange for a debtor haircut... You said "Not really" when I said that the only plausible endgame was defaulting and/or leaving the Euro. Outline another option. The end game is a lot of people lose a lot of money, and when they go down, the credit market dries up for any country in any similar look/style/situation. They can leave the EZ all they want, and have cheap money, but nobody will lend them more, and other countries get to fall with them, and nobody will want to lend them anything either. And that = bad.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 02:54 PM) I will never blame a hitter for taking a walk, because he didn't produce an out. No hitter should ever be looking for a walk, they do what is given to them. I also don't expect them to smash every bad pitch thrown them, if the foul it off or whatever and proceed to walk then that is what was given to them. It's the at bats where guys chase bad pitches, etc that kill me. Essentially, Im a big proponent of pitch recognition, the better you have the better hits and OBP you will have. I don't blame them for taking walks when they have no other choice...for example, on ball 4 that bounced 10 feet in front of the plate. However, I DO fault them for trying to draw a walk on an IFFY close call that could have gone either way and instead of swinging they left the bat on their shoulder. If the ball is that close, I'd rather you swing than leave it up to an inconsistent umpire because the ball was 1 inch inside. And I believe this is exactly what Manto is saying.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 02:55 PM) If we're going to be playing the spin-this-into-a-negative game this offseason, then I'm leaving. Unbelievable. The guy hasn't even started his first day on the job and we hate him. This is Soxtalk...didn't you know?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 02:45 PM) It's not dumb at all. He's thinking outside of the box about how to create the most runs possible. I hate to break it to you, but creating runs is the entire goal here. Obviously, all things being equal, the more runners on base, the more runs, but he's talking about not taking a walk for the mere sake of taking a walk. He's talking about your best hitters knocking in runs as opposed to taking a walk to increase their on base percentage. ...and I agree with him. How many times do we have to watch someone take a walk only to be stranded on base because the people behind them make nothing happen? The most prolific hitters should be looking to make something happen, not look for walks...and in that regard, I agree with him.

I say Jefferson, because it's like he invented a time machine, came forward to the present, and then went back and said the following things to warn us BEFORE it happened: “I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” “Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases.” ...and last but most importantly... “I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” He didn't foresee this...he knew.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 10:11 AM) I have a big ass Jeep (with a hemi), and the main reason is getting into a bad accident with my little infiniti and literally being inches away from it killing me since it crumbled so easily. Theres just something more comforting about being in a 5k+ lb SUV. Plus the storage space has been really nice and during last years snow storm it completely owned that s***. Accidents happen -- including ones you'd never foresee. And yes, having a big ass Jeep can matter if/when they happen. My accident this past summer: Jeep full of cargo, 1 passenger, 2 and 3/4 rolls down a hill that started off as a clean drop. Slid into it, and down we went. Not a scratch on either passenger. No mechanical damage. Tipped that b**** back onto it's wheels and drove it out. Yes, it was what they'd call a "harrowing" experience not knowing where you are rolling or when/if you will stop, or what you're going to hit on the way down.

I don't think it has anything to do with having a "man card". As far as I'm concerned, you should have the car/vehicle that suits your needs, to get from point a to point b. If you don't have a need for something bigger to carry cargo, etc...than this is all you need, and in that case, it's the SMART thing to have. I have 2 cars -- a 07 4 door Chrysler Sebring (gets about 30mpg highway), and a 07 4 door Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, (which gets about 19-20mpg highway). I love both and use both for different reasons.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 1, 2011 -> 07:50 AM) I like the facial expression of the only other non-zombie in the shot. He's like "Rahm... for the love of God, please help us!" ...and Rham is too busy txting to help, yo.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 02:36 PM) .....ok.....we get it ...and I care that you get it why?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) That's alright, as long as you learn from your mistakes. ::spits out gum and slaps it into a nearby crowd:: Next time I'm just going to just "accidentally bump into the ref to knock him out" and use a steel chair. Because you know, bumping into ref's knocks them out cold for a good 10 minutes no matter how soft you connect.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 01:11 PM) My thread was in response to yours. In essense, you attempted your finisher on me, but I countered and indeed Perfect Plexed you for the 3 count. How dumb of me to try applying the perfect plex on the guy that invented it...duh, of course you know how to reverse it!

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 12:58 PM) Preemptive thread for those "going against the grain" by complaining about complaining. Sorry but my thread about complaining about complaining was posted first. Perfect Plex applied. You lose.

QUOTE (mataipaepae @ Oct 31, 2011 -> 12:55 PM) how about giving this guy a 1 year deal and see if he can be our centerfielder and leadoff? if he can remain healthy he could really help out our offense alot. He can't.

I say fire him now before it becomes "Soxtalk bandwagon cool" to say it. Because these professional hitters need someone that can teach them how to hit.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 29, 2011 -> 11:10 AM) It's baseball dumb to say that the trade didn't directly contribute to the Cards winning the WS. They had lost 7 of the last 8 games McClellan had started when they traded for EJax to replace him. Their bullpen had cost them countless games all year and needed to be shaken up. I never said the White Sox made a bad trade or that they shouldn't have made it. But in the long run, it will probably be an inconsequential trade for them. The trade directly contributed to a World Series title for St. Louis. Winner! It is, so I apologize for taking too far of an opposite view stance on this, because normally I wouldn't. The absurdity of Soxtalk when it comes to White Sox baseball is my excuse for bringing out the worst in me in this case. The trade -- not simply for EJ, but all of the guys the Cards brought in -- contributed to their eventual win. The trade -- had it not happened -- would NOT have helped the White Sox. Period. I'm not directly speaking about you, but I read a few posts where people eluded to the fact that we lost the trade because the Cards got EJ (just one piece of the puzzle that helped them in the end), and they won a WS...as if to say had we kept him we would have. Fact is we would have done nothing with or without him. And getting rid of Teahen makes this trade a super win for the Sox considering that contract. You have to understand that on Soxtalk, 99% of what is said is negative, even when things are going VERY well. And if they [Crew Neg] can go back and find a story that turned into a positive for another team (such as this specific story), they will bring it back up to show how inept the Sox are. I was here before 05, and having to read posts here was like hanging out with Randy Quaid in the bleachers in Major League, "There just gonna blow it..." Even AFTER we won the WS, the negatives slowly crept back into the conversations about how they won, and how they won in spite of every major mistake the organization could have made. If they could find a negative and ruin everyone's good time...they will. And all of you know who you are. It's why 99.9% of my posts are now in the Filibuster, because talking baseball here is like talking to one huge collective of nothing. And things haven't gotten better -- if anything -- they've gotten WAY worse.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 29, 2011 -> 10:33 AM) They may not have made the playoffs without him, he filled the hole at the back of their rotation. They went 9-4 in games he started including 5-1 in Septemeber. He won an elimination game vs. Philly in game 4 of the NLDS. Their bullpen was garbage most of the season, and Dotel & Rzepczynski helped stabilize it and stop blowing so many games. Scrabble got some huge outs vs lefties in the playoffs and Dotel owns Ryan Braun. Without those 3 guys, odds are they don't complete the comeback and make the playoffs, let alone win it all. I'm not saying that the Blue Jays & White Sox are idiots for making this trade or that they have regrets. But the Cardinals won the WS as a direct result from this trade. They won. There's no real way to prove that they wouldn't have won without him just as well. The point is, to say the Cardinals "won" in the trade simply because they "won the series" is just cause-and-effect bulls*** that cannot be proven. The Sox didn't lose in that trade, regardless. The Sox weren't going to win the WS (let alone the division) with EJ and Tehen anyway, so getting rid of both and getting anything in return, as far as I'm concerned, is a win for the White Sox in that trade. So in saying the Cards won in that trade and the Sox lost is simply disingenuous. To say otherwise is just baseball dumb.

QUOTE (Hawkfan @ Oct 29, 2011 -> 09:32 AM) I don't see how we lost considering we had 6 Starting pitchers, The worst player ever in Mark Teahen, and an appetite for Relief Pitchers. Trades are not a zero sum game. If the Cardinals Had Adam Dunn, and we had pujols, we would have won 207 regular season games this year. Stop making sense. I'll break this down so you can understand it like the rest of the negative anything the White Sox do gang on Soxtalk... The Cardinals won the world series because they got Edwin Jackson. You know, because of his posted 1-1 postseason record with that awesome 5.60 ERA he posted and all. Without him, the Cards had no chance. Even though, to be fair, he pitched well in the WS. They didn't win because of him. At least, that's what a few people are saying right now. Which makes them what I call completely and totally baseball dumb.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 03:31 PM) Designated "shoot me in the face" protest zone Not even sure what this is supposed to mean.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 05:55 PM) 50 over a six year period, is the conservative estimate. 50 deaths by police against civilians. Actual deaths after tasers have been used were 300+ over that 6 year period. That's really f***ing high. And I don't care about the margins, but the amount of times i've seen tasers come out has been ridiculous. It's a crutch. More people get killed by cows every year than by tasers. Maybe we should rid the world of those dastardly evil and dangerous cows, too. Because, you know, we can't have any dangerous stuff out there...people might accidentally die, even though it's not intentional. Oh, wait no...probably not a great comparison, right? Maybe we should just disarm the police completely and see how long it takes the savage humans to start picking off the civilized ones in numbers far exceeding what we have now, because so long as these dangerous police are armed, accidents might happen and nobody is safe. Not sure what I'm talking about? Go take a leasurly stroll around the IIT campus and your chances of seeing it will skyrocket. You know the only thing that controls that around there are -- and get this -- police armed with dangerous guns and even more dangerous tasers! Gasp, I know. If only the entire world were coated with rubber and nobody ever got hurt. The tasers come out first BECAUSE they can't draw their f***ing guns until they're lives are in *imminent* danger. Also, they're no longer allowed to carry batons or large flashlights that can be used as deadly weapons. The taser is considered less dangerous than either the baton or maglight, btw. If a police officer in Chicago draws their gun, they have to write up a report on why, and believe me...someone saw them do it. And if they don't have a good reason why... They can go collect unemployment.

Jefferson.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 04:11 PM) For the sake of argument, let's say two bottles are thrown at police in riot gear from an otherwise peaceful crowd not showing any signs of aggression. Is firing or throwing a dozen tear gas canisters into that crowd an appropriate response? I don't know, I'm not an expert on such things. I'm sure many police would say yes in a situation such as that, though...otherwise they wouldn't be armed with such things.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:43 PM) The motivations and intentions of the crowd are important factors. Sometimes original motives and intentions can get twisted and corrupted by just a few...and the snowball begins rolling downhill. Not always, but it happens.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Oct 27, 2011 -> 01:06 PM) No, I'm saying if you look at the history of protests in this country, which group has overreacted more often? There have been many occasions where protesters have been killed in this country. I'm not anti-cop. I'm just saying they can overreact. It's a razor's edge type of situation for them, and it's always easy to second guess it. If they let things get out of hand just a second longer than they should have, a situation like that can turn into a full out riot, complete with looting and many innocent bystanders getting hurt or killed. Then what you have is the exact opposite of what you have here...and you'd all be b****ing the police should have stepped in sooner and done something BEFORE the violence erupted. It's a fine line...and it's easy to sit behind a computer, watch a few videos and call the police names...it's a different story when you have to be there and know how easily a riot can break out in a situation that's obviously escalating. If you've ever seen a riot, you'd know most of those rioting are normally law abiding citizens that get crazy...and suddenly turn into a primal savages. Whatever the case may be, be thankful you don't have to be there/weren't there. But believe me when I tell you this, MOST cops -- I'd say 99.5% of them -- they don't want trouble...ever. They'd rather go through their entire shift not seeing anyone do anything wrong than to get caught up in a situation like this.