jackie hayes

A great quote from Jendayi Frazer, the assistant secretary of state for African affairs, on the election results in Zimbabwe. Nice to see someone state the obvious: Really, I just love the last part. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/world/af...25zimbabwe.html

Liriano got the s*** kicked out of him today. It's gonna be while.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2008 -> 04:18 PM) I guess I'll be the one to bring this up also....I also find it interesting that his peak years were in Oakland shortly after the time that Jason Giambi's peak years happened, and his last really great years were 2002-2003. Right before the start of PED Suspensions. Maybe it's not fair to bring that up with every guy who falls off a cliff after 2003, but that's the bed the owners and MLBPA made when they let the problem fester for so long. This is weak. If using PEDs allowed Zito extra zip on his fastball, then his strikeout numbers make no sense. They dropped precipitously from 2001 to 2003, and actually recovered after testing began. He hasn't become dramatically smaller. He hasn't become injury-prone since testing began. Speculation is gonna happen, but you should at least provide some reason to believe the suspicion is reasonable.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2008 -> 09:56 AM) Jehovah's Witnesses are not allowed to pledge to any flag due to their religious beliefs. Is it fair to force them to violate their religious beliefs for a grade? Dollars to donuts exceptions are made for religion. You know, that expression has really lost all it's meaning now...

QUOTE (Soxy @ Apr 24, 2008 -> 10:33 AM) I can do one--but is anyone here (other than myself) pro-Hillary? I'm ambivalent. Or maybe indifferent. I'm still not sure which, though it probably doesn't matter.

QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 23, 2008 -> 04:50 PM) The few innings I have seen this year, he has no control. Walking lots of guys. I don't think that's it. Lots of guys have started the year wilder than normal. It's just shaking off the rust. Zito's always been wild, and this year he's only slightly worse than last year (4.2 bb/9 ip vs about 3.8 last year), which in turn is only a little wilder than his norm (3.6 bb/9 ip over his career). His strikeouts are down and hitters are just beating the hell out of him. That's about it. He's probably been a little unlucky (I don't know where to find babip, but 34 hits in about 26 ip suggests it may be high). But still, his pitches have nothing. Good luck with that, SF.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 23, 2008 -> 01:35 PM) Oh, I'm sure downstate Illinois would be perfectly happy to break away from the Chicago area. They do it overnight just to keep Blago out?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 23, 2008 -> 01:59 PM) Not that it matters, but with Clinton's recent question about, "Why can't Obama win the big states?", I have her answer... The big states don't matter, Hillary. They never matter. Because *regardless* which democratic candidate makes it in, the SAME big states are going to vote for them, just like they do in every election. Chicago, New York, California = Automatically democratic. You can put it in the bank. Texas = Republican. Put this in the bank, also. The swing states, and the states inbetween that can change the tide of an election are the states that matter. Now I wish she and her minions would seriously think about that before they say it again, because it's beyond stupid to even bring up. Honestly, and this goes to anyone here reading this, if you think Chicago/New York/Cali will not go to Obama or Clinton, regardless of which get in, you too, are an idiot. I'm very confused. Chicago seceded?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 23, 2008 -> 09:11 AM) That leaves one thing - the 400 remaining supers. The only way Clinton wins, at convention or otherwise, is if 75% of the remaining supers vote against the delegate count AND against the popular vote AND against the number of states won, and endorse Clinton anyway. How likely to you think that really is? Not a chance. This thing has been over for a while now. I thought it was kind of cute how excited everyone was yesterday. The power of marketing.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 07:57 PM) YOU suck! Suck!...Suck!...Suck!!...Suck!!...Suck!!...

I'm not sure about figures, but I am confident that, whatever the precise final tally, in the end, one way or another, by one point or by ten, it will turn out that, no matter what the pollsters said before, by virtue of extensive campaigning, the Dems will take this one. Yessiree, Bob.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 04:31 PM) Are you referring to this? Yup. I believe there was at least one other that was a little different, but same idea, anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 03:20 PM) At this point, I certainly don't see any reason why we should panic about this. It's an election, it's a complicated thing, especially for the companies building the voting machines. It'd be nice if it was error-free, but there were bound to be a few that cropped up here or there. Show me something that suggests a few tens of thousands of people might have had their votes screwed with, or don't bother. "Some voters" doesn't cut it. Just read the comments, the claim is garbage. This claim arose around noon Eastern, but no photos of bad ballots have yet to surface, only photos of campaign literature that looks like a ballot and instructs people how to vote for particular candidates. It's nothing.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 12:03 PM) If it means more homers, more rbi and more runs scored in the same amount of AB, yes I would, but then again I always thought the object when batting was scoring runs. No, you're completely right. Rbi and runs are completely independent of what your teammates do, it really isolates a player's contribution. It's like how wins are the best stat to go by when judging pitchers, because the point of playing is to win games. Totally.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 12:36 PM) Considering Sosa didn't play everyday like Frank did, if he got 170 AB against RHP, he would have scored 10 more runs, hit 5 more homers and had at least 3 more rbi which would equal Frank's production in those categories. You would take Sosa's line last year plus 170 more abs of .222/.267/.410 production over what Frank did last year? You're serious? Well alrighty then.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 10:39 AM) Everyone has their own opinions. I'd take Sosa's production as a platoon, because even if he was "wned" by right handers I'm pretty sure he would have had as more RBI, HR and R than Frank if he had the same amount of plate appearances. You're "pretty sure" that if his plate appearances against rhp were doubled, he would suddenly start hitting them better? Even before last year, in 2005 with Baltimore, he hit them to the tune of .196/.266/.341 in 276 abs. Or you're "pretty sure" that if other teams generously conceded to pitching lefties against him every day, he'd hit better? Even though Thomas hit them better last year. (And 2005, for what that's worth.) Sure, everyone's entitled to his own opinion, but if that opinion is based on nothing but a hunch, I don't know why you think anyone else should believe it.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 11:13 AM) Sosa wanted $7 million or $8 million after last season's numbers. You want to talk OBP, what good does OBP mean if you don't score? Sosa had about 170 less plate appearances, hit 5 fewer homers, drove in 3 less runs and scored 10 less times. Project him with Frank's ABs and he scores more runs than Frank, hits more homers and drives in more runs. Frank is beyond station to station. We'll see when Frank is on the market next season exactly what he is offered. I'd bet my house its nowhere near $10 million. You can't project that way, because Sosa was used largely as a platoon player. He had almost exactly the same number of abs against lhp as Thomas, and hit them worse (.328/.410/.613 vs Thomas's .336/.431/.633). The only reason his numbers 'look' close is because they often sat him against rhp, who owned him (.222/.267/.410 vs Thomas's .259/.360/.435). He's basically a pure platoon dh, which means he's less valuable than Frank, who kills lefties even more than Sosa and is decent against righties (approximately an .800 ops -- still a productive hitter). I never said Frank would get $10 mil next year, and I don't believe he will. But comparing his hitting to Sosa's is absurd.

QUOTE (shipps @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 08:06 AM) I never seen Clerks but I seen Clerks 2(go figure) and thought it was one of the worst movies I ever seen so I cant watch the first now. No, you should see it. I love Clerks, but coming out of 2, the first thing I said was, I don't think it would be possible to make this movie worse. Clerks is just a completely different movie. See it, see it, see it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 08:16 AM) Done. Thanks.

QUOTE (Disco72 @ Apr 22, 2008 -> 07:51 AM) Is there any new information here? Seems to be the same story...Boras said he won't negotiate (he always brings his players to FA), but Crede says he loves Chicago and would stay (implied: for the right price). EDIT: Also, the thread title is a bit misleading - it seems as if he was traded today, not that he won't sign here after the season is over. Yeah, just a little. Please change that, someone.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 09:21 PM) I wasn't trying to answer that question. I copied your specific post twice now. That is what I am responding to. A player earns his money by playing. How much simpler can I make it? so If you are taking a shower after the game and the other players stare and say, why are you taking a shower? You didn't play! You might not have earned you money. If the trainer has not washed your uniform in two weeks. You might not have earned your money. If your career ending insurance premium is less than a McDonald's cheeseburger, you probably are not earning your money If the manager forgot your name because he hasn't penciled it in for a month, you probably have not earned your money If the equipment manager gives away your jersey number, you probably are not earning your pay. If your uniform has left a shadow on the back of the bench, you are not earning your pay. Anytime a player is not playing they are not earning their money. For whatever reason. Injury, poor play, manager doesn't like guys from Ohio, suspended for arguing balls and strikes, it doesn't matter. If they are not playing, they are not earning their money. If they started hiring sitters, then guys could earn money sitting. But they hire players. So if after this, you are still confused, reread your posts and my replies. So vampire players are cool, right? Just want to make sure all our beloved Pale Sox are okay.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 08:12 PM) Its a cute story, it still doesn't answer the question as to how stinking up the joint earns you at bats and earns you a $10 million option just because you were an MVP 14 years ago. Sammy Sosa hit .252 last year in 412 AB with 21 homers and 92 rbi. Pretty similar to Frank last year. He wanted $7 million or $8 million to play this year. He's not playing. Its not about being a cheerleader, its about a team needing to play its 9 best players at the time to win the game. I have no problem with Frank wanted to play, but sometimes he has to be realistic. How many o 0-fers until you get a break? Frank has been bad lately, so he has to sit. Take some extra hitting, make some adjustments and when you hit again, you play regularly again. You want to start by explaining away the 66 points in obp, or how the season before that is completely irrelevant, or how more frequent steroids testing should affect them both equally? Your choice. That is a RIDICULOUS comparison.

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 02:38 PM) Eddie Collins was considered to be the greatest defensive second baseman of all time until Robbie Alomar came along, correct? Some would argue Joe Morgan as well. We're also talking about 3300+ hits, a lifetime .424 OBP, etc. You don't hear much about him, but he's arguably the greatest second baseman of all time behind Rogers Hornsby. Rogers is on an island; nobody could ever possibly f*** with him, but Eddie is in that second tier group along with Nap Lajoie, Charlie Gehringer, etc. Of course, Nap Lajoie is one of the foremost defensive butchers out of the 2B slot in baseball history, but his offensive prowess was extraordinary. Yeah, but his years with the Sox weren't his best. Not that they were bad, and there were some amazing ones strewn in, but his reputation rests heavily on those great years with the A's.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 01:33 PM) Rolen will be their DH for the next three years thus the reasoning why Frank was let go. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...sp&c_id=mlb

QUOTE (WCSox @ Apr 21, 2008 -> 12:25 PM) No, it's not strange at all. You can't just keep spending, spending, and spending on high-priced veterans and free agents without dumping SOME salary at some point. Dumping an aging player doesn't necessarily mean that you're about to hold a firesale. It's simply operating within a budget. The Jays aren't exactly the Yankees or Red Sox in terms of financial resources, yet their payroll this year is $97 million. Do you honestly think that they can sustain that payroll while mired in third place in a city in Canada wit attendance in the bottom half of the league over each of the past few years? The fact that they still owe Rolen over $30 million through 2010 and that he hasn't had a single major-league at-bat for them yet may have been a wake-up call for them. He and Frank ALONE would've cost them $22 million next year. Would you want two declining/injury-prone players taking up that much of your payroll? I sure wouldn't. They knew Rolen's situation when they acquired him. It's hardly a wake-up call when it's exactly what you expect. The last paragraph is odd. You're saying you wouldn't want them both around. So why wouldn't you do what Toronto did? If they thought Thomas + Stairs fielding would be much more productive than Stairs + Lind fielding, they could have had that for 2 more years for $10 mil. No, obviously they can't spend just any amount of money, but that's just not that much for a $100 mil team. They aren't going to hurt a good team to save a mere 5% of payroll. And it's not too far-fetched that someone might think Stairs + Lind fielding makes a better team than having Stairs in the of and Thomas hitting. I understand that you think that's utterly ridiculous. Fine, I just don't agree. I'm done with this argument. I think I've said what I have to say, and at this point it's becoming redundant. Last word is yours.