ptatc

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Oct 6, 2012 -> 11:10 PM) We're looking at the same facts and seeing it differently. That's all. Yes. This would have been a significant surgery. I run with a great many orthopaedic guys, including those who work closely with the current and former Sox guys. And it was also a significant INJURY. As I said, in HINDSIGHT (because we couldn't tell whether the chips/bodies would move around in such a way that would free Paul up, or, whether he'd be the miracle man and be able to do the most difficult thing in all of sports -- with one hand tied behind his back), we would have been better off with EVEN a Johnson/Jackson platoon pairing. Clearly, a better idea would have been an acceptable and experienced power bat. I had no problem with trying to see if Paul could play this way. I have a big problem with trying it this was for nearly 2-1/2 months, when even a dedicated fan (and of course all advanced scouts) could see that Paul was no longer Paul, he was essentially Gordon Beckham (but being asked to do Paul's job in the #4 hole). Yep. The Sox have a lot of money tied-up with Konerko. They also have a lot of money tied-uo with an aging roster as a whole (with a limited window to win). And they have a fiduciary duty (of sorts) to put the best product out there for the paying customer. We'll continue to disagree because at some point, sooner or later, they should have stopped Paul from trotting out there with the same old problem, but somehow expecting a different result. Sounds like that folksy definition of "insanity." Really respect your many medical field contributions here, but I think whether to play this guy, and for how long, as you yourself admit, is much broader than a medical decision. That was einstein's definition. And I fully agree that is was more than medical but it also was not PK's alone to make. My original point is that is was not PK's ego or "macho toughness" alone that made the decision. It was a combination of this plus the management team realizing that what PK could give them was better than whatever else they had. I also agree that they could have shut him down if KW could find a replacement that was better than PK with the injured wrist. In hindsight PK was bad but I don't think they really had any other option on the team or in the minors.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) First off PTATC ... I always enjoy your contributions, especially those involving medical and physical therapy related issues (I have MANY friends and relatives in the orthopaedic surgery world, so I know that the words of those with experience are valuable and carry a lot of weight). However, we'll have to disagree on this one. Maybe better than saying "stupidity and selfishness," I should have said "stupidity and out of control ego." I agree -- Captain Paul is not at all a selfish player. But he IS a player. And ego helps a star player transcend ho-hum, league average players, and play at the star level. Clearly, Paul thought that even one-handed, he had the talent, smarts, and resolve to help the team. But you know what? While you love that attitude, hitting a baseball is fricking difficult. And Paul's post All-Star game stats (NOT his second half ... but post All Star where I believe he hit in the .230's for the remainder of the year, plus the occasional HR or two ... basically, he hit like Gordon Beckham), plus his completely different Mr. Slappy Approach (which told ME ... and I'm sure scouts too .. that he had no confidence that he could continue to mash in his familiar style), was ego overtaking smarts. A mashing threat out of a first baseman or DH (because since Dunn was there for first base, then ANY available strong bat could have replaced Konerko) could have been tried. You're right -- Konerko, and therefore likely Ventura and/or KW, thought a damaged Konerko was BETTER than the other options -- but I guess I disagree. Obviously with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been better to perhaps platoon Dan Johnson and Connor Jackson (probably our system's best and most advanced bats) instead of getting what we wound up getting from post All-Star break Paul Konerko. Or, asked KW to trade away some of our surplus of decent relief arms (your Omogrossos, Marinezes, Heaths, and so on, of the world) for mashers you might like better than Johnson and Jackson. But, all I'm saying now is that some of us are not just saying this in hindsight. We saw it happening. Because Paul is such a known commodity (with certain tendencies), it wasn't difficult to see what was happening. I'm in no way saying that I'm smarter or more baseball savvy than Konerko, Ventura, or Williams, but I also don't have any difficulty using my eyeballs and logic over ego, where I think one or all of these gentlemen prioritized ego over logic. It was worth a try to see if he could still perform one-handed. But that try meant 2-3 weeks, NOT 2-3 months. To me, that was one of the major "bad decisions" of this always interesting 2012 season. Yes, we will have to disagree. I still don't think that a platoon of Jackson and Johnson would have been much better than PK. At the time you didn't know how much it would effect him. If KW could have acquired a better option, I agree. If he has the surgery he is pretty much out for at least 4-6 weeks and with a rehab assignment for getting timing back you are looking at 2 months minimum without him. With the 2-3 weeks of trying it first That's almost September before he returns. I agree that all professional athletes have that ego that helps their confidence and pushes them to another level. However, in a case like this it would have been a combo decision between PK,RV,KW, Herm Schneider and Bush-Joseph (their primary orthopedic surgeon). So putting it on PK and his ego would have been only a small piece of the decision, if at all. With the money invested in the players these days the other members of the decision carry alot of the weight. It's not like this was a sprained ankle, strained hamstring or something to "gut through." This was a significant surgery.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 05:42 PM) You guys need to please erase your disdain for Ozzeroo a moment to hear me out. Olney's scoop proves Oz is out of a job. Ozzie is without a team (KC should hire him TOMORROW but that's a different topic). However I want to make a point about the whole issue. This whole thing is a microcosm of society. What Ozzie did a few weeks ago was anger a rich man, a man who has a bunch of yes men around him. This rich man (Loria) was called out (sort of) by Ozzie. Ozzie said something like, 'Why do they have so many managers that have been fired?' Or something like 'Why has he had so many managers?' When the rich f***, Loria, read those statements, that was it for Ozzie. This tells us a lot about Loria. By god, NOBODY in that man's life talks down to him; nobody in Loria's life can get away with calling him out publicly. Case closed. Ozzie said something about Loria and that is that. Oz was gone on that day. It just obviously INFURIATED Loria. Now the question is: Is Oz smart as a Fox? Did he do it to get 3 years salary for no work? Realizing that Loria is a buffoon and working for him is something you do not want to do? Or did Ozzie get caught being Ozzie again? If you hear the interview it is totally obvious Loria is overreacting. But Loria is acting like the spoiled rich boy he is. Wow! An underling like Ozzie called him out; bye bye. This is a lesson for all of us in real life. You call out your 'boss' and you are GONE! The difference here, Mr. Loria, is Ozzie is also rich. And he's a former spoiled ballplayer. Mr. Loria, if you want a yes man, butt kisser then you better hire somebody who needs the job. Ozzie never said anything bad about Jerry cause Jerry was like his second dad. The joke is on Ozzie and Loria both. Cause Loria is now the new Steinbrenner. He goes through another manager?? Wow. Or is Ozzie laughing all the way to the bank? Did Ozzie do this for the quick cash? I'd think probably not; he probably likes going to the ballpark every day ... but going to the park and having to talk to Loria and his yes-men including his adopted son??? I dunno, folks. Ozzie may be smarter than we all think.... You obviously have something against people with money. I didn't realize it was a crime to to have money. I also didn't realize that only stupid buffoons have money. I'm not sure what you do for a living but "telling off your boss" will get you fired in almost every profession. The fact is I am one of Ozzie's supporters. I think he is a good manager. However, his mouth and antics got him pushed out of here (after the most successful run of any manager in Sox history) and he seemed to escalate it in Miami and didn't give himself a chance to succeed. It's not Loria's fault that Ozzie acted the way he did. Loria should have known about it and not hired him if he didn't like it however.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 07:47 AM) No, the Angels. Yet they are a thriving franchise. Point being the attendance issue is blown way out of proportion. They also have a single majority owner who is a billionaire. That is a great advantage as opposed to the ownership group which the Sox have.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Oct 1, 2012 -> 12:10 PM) To clarify, I am pretty sure he gained a lot of MUSCLE weight, not fat. IIRC, he was told to bulk up, but that added mass ended up hurting him. This offseason he is expected to work back to where he used to be, physically. Gaining the weight even with muscle is not a problem. I'ts a decrease in flexibility that goes along with it that is the problem. There are too many weightlifting programs that do not include the flexibility exercises for pitchers. Pitcher's need to have the range of motion in the hips and core to get the motion they need. Too many focus only on the shoulder range, which is important obviously but the others will hinder the motion as well.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 09:27 AM) I think it ultimately depends on Peavy. If Peavy can be re-signed, Gavin will be gone. If not, he stays. The Sox are in desperate need of some OBP and Gavin is the best trade chip for getting it. Depends on the player in return. You can never have too much cheap, good starting pitching. I wouldn't sacrifice it unless you get a MLB starting or ready player who will really help the offense. Pitching should still be the primary focus. It's more cost effective to have a good staff and defense.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 09:22 AM) What were the Pads thinking of when they gave him that deal? Blows my mind. Locking up a young, popular, Cy Young award winner, who enjoyed playing there, for a long time.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 11:29 PM) Then you pick up his option and trade.him. $9.5 mil for Gavin Floyd will find a suitor and we at least get SOMETHING back. I think trading him would be a mistake. There aren't many proven american league starting pitchers with winning records for under 10 mil. On a team with severe budget constraints, he is very valuable.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 03:08 PM) No offense, man, but me and many others who watch often and closely have been saying the same thing for months. I personally had various comments about this on this board and others for months, including a few weeks ago putting the over-under at something like 5-7 days after the end of the season when it would be disclosed that Konerko was undergoing wrist surgery. Like every player in baseball, he's had his share of slumps, but this was completely different. Slump or no slump, Konerko could always turn around ANYBODY'S fastball. Always. Post All Star break, he was consistently getting beat by major league average fastballs. Once the word got out (and it always does), down the stretch virtually every pitcher in baseball was challenging him with heat (knowing the only way he could turn one around was if he cheated big-time, but, more often than not, he was just looking to slap one the other way anyway). He became a totally different hitter. I've always been a major Konerko fan, but there's a point where tough-guy and macho turns into stupidity and selfishness. Soon, we had no "fear factor" going in the middle of the lineup -- between three outcome Dunn and the slap-hitting ghost that formerly was Paul Konerko, it's little wonder that we posed little threat to good teams, hot teams, or plain old teams who for whatever reason get up especially for the Sox. For that charade to go on for as long as it did was a total slap in the face to knowledgeable fans who understand the game. And for Konerko to come right out and say with 2-3 games left in the year, (paraphrasing) "yeah, the wrist is damaged ... but I don't think it affected my performance," is another slap in the face. Sure it affected your performance. Every advance scout in baseball could see it. And while I'm on a roll, I generally really liked what Ventura did this year as a first year manager (especially the emphasis on fundamentals and focusing on one game at a time), but ALLOWING a clearly damaged PK to play everyday ... in the #4 hole ... is on him as well. He runs the team. Whether Konerko wants to be Mr. Man or not and play hurt/damaged, Ventura needed to be a strong enough manager/leader to tell him to get his butt off the field. It has absolutely nothing to do with this. It has everything to do with helping his team as much as possible. If he wasn't there who was going to take his place? It was a calculated risk that 4 months of an injured PK was going to be better than at least 2 months, if not more, of a lesser player. PK is not a person to put himself before the team. If he and Ventura thought the team would be better without him playing the way he was then it would have happened.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 4, 2012 -> 06:50 AM) Oakland led MLB in team strikeouts and they won 94 games. The Sox had 184 fewer strikeouts than Oakland and won 85 games. Oakland had a K/BB ratio of 2.52, the Sox had a K/BB ratio of 2.61. Maybe sometime this decade people will realize that K/BB ratio matters more than strikeout totals. Sox K/BB ratios: Konerko 1.48 Youk 1.86 Dunn 2.11 Beckham 2.23 De Aza 2.32 AJ 2.79 Rios 3.54 Viciedo 4.29 Ramirez 4.81 The Sox scored 748 runs. Oakland scored 713. The Sox offense was better than Oakland's. Maybe strikeouts do limit your team's offense.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 26, 2012 -> 09:48 AM) This 100%. It's not a motivation problem. This team is just out of gas. I think alot of it comes down to the wrist injury to PK. He had the "minor" surgery but really hasn't been the same. With the rest of the offense being weak, they've really missed his production. Once the pitching began to wear down, the offense couldn't make up for it. Hopefully next year Sale and Quintana are stronger. Although there are some studies that show the huge jump in innings this year will adversely effect their performance next year.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Sep 26, 2012 -> 02:50 PM) I read that article earlier. I would like ptatc to chime in as I find it hard to believe. Playing with pulled oblique had him sitting for a days but he's back playing with torn muscle? I dont buy it. They both could be accurate. A tear is nothing more than a 3rd degree strain. If the MRI showed a tear then it's classified as a strain. A player can play with a tear, it just depends how large it is. If it's smaller the a centimeter massage and electrical modalities could easily keep the pain to a minimum. The oblique muscles cover a large are but a very thin compared to other muscles. I'm sure he is in pain but coming down to the end of the year it's not surprising that he is working through it.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Sep 20, 2012 -> 11:33 AM) ^^^ That's exactly what I meant. Actually, at my daughter's school that's exactly what they do. She told me that at least one kid has to sit in a completely separate lunchroom. Surprisingly, the kid's parents haven't complained to the school that they need to completely ban peanut butter and all other products that may contains nuts. Instead they let their kid know that he's a little different than all the other kids so he has to do things a different way and it's OK. We had this at our kid's school as well. However, it was only through 3rd grade when some of the kids may not know how severe the allergy was and how they could effect it. Now the the girl (my daughter's friend) eats with her friends in the lunchroom and everyone with her realizes what they can and can't bring.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) Paraphrasing Duran Duran: "HIS name is RIOS and HE dances on the sand." (and it pains me to paraphrase that group because nobody hates hates Duran Duran more than I do). The season is far from over, but Gordon Beckham is wrong -- he said "that might be the play of the year." That WAS the play of the year. Fundamentals; hustle; playing hard every moment. As the games become more important, little things matter -- big-time. Most people pooh pooh momentum in baseball, saying cute things like "momentum is only as good as tomorrow's starting pitcher." And indeed, momentum can be overstated. And have a short shelf-life. But gosh darn-it ... the Rios play should absolutely energize these guys in the same way a playoff caliber team is energized when an accomplished hitter gives up an at-bat to advance the runner to third, or when El Duque galvanizes the 2005 team when he pitched his inning for the ages and retired the Red Sox without allowing a run. It won't guarantee wins and losses from this point forward, but I'd love to see "The Takeout Slide" be a springboard for virtually non-stop hustle and intensity until 2012's final pitch! Who would have characterized Rios like this last year? What difference a year makes. Who says players can't change from year to year. The baseball card doesn't say everything.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 11:16 AM) They will be NO more effective after this strike ends. How much would you like to bet that the school system continues to get worse, despite all of these "added awesome benefits for the children"? I will venture to say that they will be more effective in teaching a class of 25 students versus a class of 35 students. However, I don't think this let get through so it's a moot point.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 10:59 AM) We disagree. You're point is what is, simply put, nonsense. Not only that, but you have an inherent bias here, and it shows. The story fits my narrative because teachers are greedy douchebags that don't deserve a raise. The CPS teachers want more money for less work, and a better all around situation for THEMSELVES. Don't f***ing stand there and pretend they'red oing this for the children. Just can it. This is incorrect. The money involved is already agreed upon. It's the evaluation procedure that is the key. The teachers want a say in what the principal deems "effective teaching." The class size is also an issue. If you've ever been in a room with 35 kids, you know how difficult it would be to be an "effective instructor." That is an impossible situation.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 04:01 PM) Because when you have 2 children who cant agree, you need an adult to supervise. Id rather the school system took care of it themselves, but according to StrangeSox they are currently striking because they cant come to an agreement on how to resolve this. That is inexcusable. I agree it's a tough situation but throwing more money into more administrative functions and taking it away from instruction is not what I would want to do. The administration should just to what's fair.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 03:57 PM) But that sets up this issue in Chicago entirely because it leaves no mechanism for redistribution from wealthy districts to poor districts, and as has been noted previously, the CPS area is one of the most poverty-ridden school districts in the country, with nearly 90% of its students qualifying for the federal free/reduced price meal programs. I agree it is a poor way to do it. It makes it tough to get good education in Chicago. The educational funding in Illinois is unfair. Back when there were factories and such in low income areas it worked out to the benefit of the areas. Not so much since they are gone. I'm just pointing out that the way the system works and why Illinois seems to be "underfunding" the state school system.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 03:53 PM) Yep, I am completely unfamiliar with teachers. I only spent 21 years of life in schools, spent over $250k on education. I have no experience to say, this teacher is competent and that teacher is not. Im sure that it would be impossible to find 3-5 ex-educators who have no relation to CTU/CPS who live in Chicago, who would be impartial. Right from your proposal: Mentor Teachers will be CPS employees. Why do we need conflicts of interest? Why cant we just get impartial people? You act like Im suggesting to hire a random person off the street. I just want people who are not connected to CPS or CTU. Imagine the uproar for the cost of this program. Hiring people not connected with the schools to evaluate the individual teachers. It sounds good but it just adds to the administrative costs to the schools. Why take more money away from actual teaching. Just use a team of admin and teachers and be done with it. The problem is that there is too much money going to non-instructional purposes already.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Sep 12, 2012 -> 03:12 PM) That's because they borrowed billions from the pensions and gambled it away...and now they have insolvent guaranteed public pensions they need to fix. So, they raise taxes on the state/local level through the roof, and it can't even make a dent in the problem they created, so they start taking it from everywhere else, too...such as schools. And IL/Chicago residents will continue to re-elect them. The part about the State of Illinois being one of the lowest with funding education is somewhat misleading. Most states collect property taxes and distribute them fairly evenly to school districts while illinois has the property taxes go straight to the school districts in the area. So this makes it look like the state doesn't contribute much compared to other while in reality is just the way it is distributed is different. We don't really have less funding it's just that we have rich school districts and poor school districts.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:48 PM) No I am informed, and am so each time we pay for all this in taxes. If you were informed, you would know those benefits aren't free. In the end It doesn't matter to me if it's salary or some gold plated benefit it goes into. Then there is no 90k salary as you said before. You are not figuring it out correctly just making blanket statements. Paying taxes does not equal being informed Do I think we pay too much in taxes. Yes. is it because of the teachers. No. It has much more to do with the inefficiencies in the administrations in all of the government agencies in this state. As I stated before, since I'm the wealthy looking down on the rest I declare this part terminated.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:37 PM) the teachers are totally out of touch with reality. the wealthy entitlement class looking down at the masses, "let them eat cake". If you truly believe that teachers of all people are the wealthy class, there is no further reason for discussion.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:37 PM) It is still a hell of a lot harder to fire a teacher than it is to fire a normal person in the private sector. Illinois is an at will work state. Do you know how they fire you in the private sector. You get called into a meeting usually with HR, you are given some papers to sign and then you are gone. As long as its not for sexual orientation, age, or gender discrimination you are pretty much good to go. You can fire people for just about anything. And they don't have any appeals process. It is not difficult to fire a teacher prior to tenure. It is not called firing because until tenure your contract is "renewed" every year. Thus a teacher can be called to the principal and told they are ineffective and let go. There is a grievance process but it rarely works in favor of a teacher. This is why they work hard to get tenure.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:36 PM) not buying it. You're wrong and if you were informed you would know this. Did you know that the 16% (not 20%) increase is mostly benefits and not salary? The 90k number you came up with is if it's all salary.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:12 PM) From what I heard the teachers are now demanding a 20% increase. So, that will put the average close to 90k a year? Also, they don't want to be evaluated in any rational way, and they don't want to ever be able to be fired, no matter how bad they are at their jobs. The strike has nothing to do with kids, it has everything to do with greedy adults trying to soak the rest of the city because they think they have a desperate hostage on their hands. This is totally inaccurate. They just want a say in how they are evaluated so a principal isn't the only person who determines if they are an effective teacher. The current system allows a principal to unilaterally say you are ineffective and I can fire you. There is not an acceptable grievance procedure for a teacher to appeal the decision.