bmags

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) Yeah, I think if you were to comp the guys to current players Benintendi comps to Grady Sizemore (pre-injury) and Rutherford is more of a Matt Kemp or Jay Bruce. He's comp'd a lot to David Justice.

This brings up another point, very annoying Mizzou and Illinois are looking for coaches in the same year! And both have new ADs looking to throw around money! Ugh

I feel like the crop of potential coaches this year is so superior to 2010-2012 coaches, whose prime candidates were people like Smart who just didn't seem possible. Of course, some good coaches were grabbed. But I like the midmajor coaches like Dan hurley of Rhode Island and Kevin Keatts.

Yeah a downside to Martin is I don't find his teams' brands of basketball particularly appealing. It's not Frank Martin bad but his teams tempo has decreased last several years.

I think he will raise the floor of any program and right now getting mizzou back to 20+ wins a season is very attractive. I also think that Martin will just be a better coach in the midwest for non-proveable reasons. I think he'll recruit better, and he'll create winning, oft-frustrating but consistently dance contending teams that may pull out a very special year once in a while. I'd like the hire but not as much as I'd like Crean or Marshall. You at least know what you are getting.

You are comparing the CBO against reality. Which, fine. But you should also do that exercise of comparing it to the other models, as the commonwealth article did and found CBO to be most accurate. No, it could not predict a Supreme Court ruling that made it much less likely for medicaid to be picked up by Governors. Would you prefer a US government that uses forecast models or none? Because they are actually pretty good at what they do. There haven't been many health care bills for them to use as inputs to revise their models.

Show me a major corporation that does not have forecasting models to help with decisionmaking, then tell me why the US government should not also have the same for policies that affect millions. Models are never perfect, but they are better than not having anything. The CBO is actually rather conservative, as it does not let you include things like "cost savings from efficiency". The CBO for 40 years has been highly credible, if often frustrating for how conservative it is.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Isn't that a huge voting bloc too? So odd that they'd do this to a very "vocal" part of the electorate. It's also a very vulnerable one, most healthcare policy is designed to help people who are naturally going to be unaffordable still get care. And, you know, everybody ages so ...even if you are younger it is pretty shortsighted.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 04:51 PM) You could not wipe your ass with the last CBO report that was not even close on anything when Obamacare came out. Now it's the end all beat all. I take anything from them with caution track record not so good. It was actually the most accurate of all of the Obamacare projections: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publicatio...ll-forecast-aca CBO scoring was also a gigantic part of developing the ACA. Most of the creation of that bill was due to feedback on the CBO score on how to get the cost closer to neutral, including phaseouts of the medicaid funding to states.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 04:27 PM) Explain? So a good pitcher should have an ERA well under 1? You missed the key "good pitcher AND hitter"

Wow this is brutal for the 55-65 age people, a group that was hit very hard from recession and forced into early retirements.

Yeah, but that article was implying the sox would deal for a SS because they need to get better shortstop production. I doubt that is their rationale.

Awesome. I really like Longenhagen, I think he does a great job of breaking down swings. Tough to always pick up after popular writers leave.

With, remember when we could turn any random under 6 foot PG off the street into a competent starter that they'd then spin into multimillion dollar contracts? That was fun. not as fun as having 10 marquis teague's.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 11:44 AM) No offense, but what the f*** are you talking about it? As a middle infielder, he put up a .923 & .910 OPS in A+ & AA respectively. That's the definition of dominating. Pretty much the same results or better than Benintendi or Meadows. Bryant is an absolute freak and if you're expecting his level offense then you'll be dissapointed no matter what. With 40+ stolen bases.

QUOTE (Soha @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 11:35 AM) I'm not going to lie, I thought we'd see a little more from Moncada than we've seen thus far this spring. He is young, but being the #2 ranked prospect and the headliner for Chris Sale - I was hoping to get wowed a bit this spring. Part of it for me was wanting to see what made him such a huge prospect. His numbers don't really stand out in the minors like some of the other blue chip type prospects' numbers do. He didn't tear up any leagues like Kris Bryant, Austin Meadows or Benintendi have. So what exactly made him this monster prospect and when will it start to show it's face? Again, I know he's 21 and we need to be patient. Just saying I have a tinge of concern, that's all. Moncada outperformed Benintendi in AA at a younger age. I'm not sure that anyone will touch Kris Bryant's insane AA run for a long while.

This isn't particularly Obamacare related but this was a heartbreaking story of opiod addiction: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/12/us/opioi...-farm.html?_r=0 If you can save it and read it at some point, highly recommend.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 10:59 AM) On the Marshall front, it's at least worth noting that the Shockers have everyone coming back next year. And with the way they improved in the 2nd half of the season, they're going to be pretty special next season. Ha, true, but this also always seems to be the situation there.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 10:48 AM) He makes 3.3. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if he goes to Illinois but I don't see it. But I've been wrong in this thread once or 428483928492 billion times. I wouldn't be surprised if he moves soon. Illinois could be it, I don't think he'd jive well with a blue blood, he likes to play underdog role. But, not sure this is the year. Not sure Illinois is the program.

The average baseball fan is like in their 50s. I wouldn't make the bet that baseball will find great success in an emerging market. The 80+ home games in 40k capacity stadiums are not like filling up 40+ home games in 20k capacity stadiums, all on weeknights or weekend nights.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 10:40 AM) I think Illinois getting turned down a lot is more a function in how the coaching game is different today than it was 10+ years ago. Guys at lower level schools can make millions while still being able to make deep tournament runs every year. You don't need to be at a high major school to be a wealthy or successful coach anymore, so guys have extremely short lists of "dream job" type locations that they would leave their comfortable situations for. I've heard Gregg Marshall is actually pretty open to listening after his current team got snubbed with a 10 seed. Will that mean he ends up at Illinois? Probably not. Wouldn't be surprised to see him end up at an Indiana or something, though. Good point. When Wichita State can pay a coach 1.5 million, you are basically only leaving for a good situation. Marshall always listens, but now that his kids are in college, I think he would leave for a big payday.

Guys the Rockies are not going to trade their entire farm system and a starting outfielder (especially after losing one backup) because Ian Desmond broke his hand.

It's a shame that the reason Hinke was cut short was very likely his stupid tinkering around the edges of the roster and making enemies with player agents and the union. Had he just signed a few more terrible vets, they'd still ahve been as terrible but he'd be in charge of this thing as it revs up.

Illinois is viewed highly by coaches. Doesn't mean you get the coach you want every time, they aren't a blue blood like Kentucky/Kansas/UNC/DUke/UCLA, but it's a program that every coach picks up their phone too. But in that tier, there are a lot of other programs! So, is Illinois a great basketball job? Of course it is! Is it so good that you aren't competing with any other programs? No. Mizzou is same boat, and like U of I, finally cleared itself of a lot of Athletic Director/Booster problems that held down previous hires.

This has actually been awesome. The players are pumped, nobody is going through motions.