Balta1701

Becktackular!

Hey, we tied it

Rivera says he'll be back.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 4, 2012 -> 07:15 PM) No one said permanent, but if he's in the bullpen the rest of this season, it doesn't make much sense to have him try starting again next season and expect differnt results. I think the Sox don't believe he can do starter innings. So this makes sense. What makes no sense is the argument, not by you, that he not starting on a full time basis in Charlotte last season is the cause of this condition. I'd still say it makes plenty of sense to me. The usual rule of thumb with a pitcher is that you want to increase his innings by 25 a year. Dropping them in half and then trying to push them back up is completely the opposite.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 4, 2012 -> 07:13 PM) I can think of great benefit in certain scenarios, like this one, as I stated. However, it sounds like they are saying this is permanent, maybe In that case, well, I'm not so sure. I think it depends on his physical situation. I mean, obviously if they thought he could handle starting, they would work it out that way. They apparently don't, at least for now. Also, he could go Dempster next year, but he obviously would need to build some strength and endurance. Any ideas on where he might be able to "Build up some strength and endurance" if he's not starting? When I brought up innings as a concern last year poeple told me that he could be put in the AFL to get those, and that didn't happen. If "getting ready to be a starter" last offseason wasn't enough, what's going to change next year?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:52 PM) I can't recall at the moment...there were some articles I read earlier when that was proposed about it, written by former IRS agents that said it would accomplish almost nothing because it left too many easy openings for them to exploit. I'd have to go back and research it all over again, but I don't have the time right now. I believe it came down to corporate wording of the tax code where they could easily gain those tax preferences by changing a few simple things they perform to do business...somewhat like how Jack Abramoff said the rules are so lax and have so many holes in them that although you can't give a congress person 3000$, because it's illegal...it's not illegal if you bring a few people to dinner and call it a fundraiser, and give them the same amount of money. So, I spent some time looking for former-IRS agent commentary and this is about all that I got...a good, legitimate discussion over whether the tax plan should be favoring manufacturing as it does. In terms of "Wording of the tax code", it's darn near impossible to extract that from a Presidential proposal because the President very rarely actually writes specific bills. Congress typically does not react well to legislative text coming from the President. I struggle to see how you could say that from a Presidential Proposal...but I totally believe it's how things would end up, because a few well connected lobbyists would make sure that enough of that language stayed in the final bill to make sure that they had their loophole preserved. Then again, a few well connected lobbyists are why tax reform won't even get considered at all and never would, because a multi-billion dollar loophole for one business is enough to fund decades worth of lobbying.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:56 PM) Would Marty and Fathom be happier if everyone just said, "We suck. We've always sucked. We always will suck. Fire everyone!" Jesus. Marty, yes, that's been his goal since he showed up, to apply everything and every situation to arguing that KW should be fired, and try to make sure that the expectations are high enough where that is the case.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:46 PM) I read up on that plan earlier in the year, and from what I understood, it left huge holes in the code...and accomplished almost nothing when broken down. It's not a fix...it's barely a band aid. And Romney's alike accomplished nothing. Just as stupid. Which holes are you referring to that wouldn't be closed? My main issue with it is that it still holds to the idea of giving some sectors tax code preference over others...in that case, manufacturing continues to maintain its substantial tax subsidy...and if you're subsidizing business through tax exemptions, then lobbyists will continue to write in other exemptions eventually, leading rapidly to the same problem.

By the way, here's the President's White Paper on corporate tax reform from earlier this year. It's not a perfect plan, but it specifically lists out deductions that the current administration would like to remove in order to pay for reducing the top level from 35% to 28%. Released the same day, Mitt Romney's corporate tax reform plan is to lower the top level corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. There are no offsets for the rate deduction included, and no proposal for amending any loopholes. The only loophole he has cited closing in regards to tax reform is removing the tax deduction for 2nd mortgages.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:26 PM) He spent the winter getting himself prepared for the role. He is hurting already. If you really think the reason he is sore now is because he didn't pitch 150 innings last season in Charlotte and would have had no problems doing that and if he did, be well on his way to 175-200 IP this year, all I can say is WOW. That's pretty much the definition of the "Verducci effect". So say Wow all you want. You don't "Get yourself ready to throw as many innings in 2 months as you threw all of last year" by working out in the offseason.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:17 PM) He got hurt after 32 innings. There's a pretty good chance if he did what some wanted him to do last year, start at Charlotte, he would have had issues as well. The question was always how will he hold up. There's a big difference though between having your arm ready to throw 70 innings in a year and throwing those 70 innings in March and April.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:11 PM) How do you know starting him in AAA last year wouldn't have produced the same result? Seems like quite the reach there. I don't, but I do have one thing that backs me up...if you count Cape Cod league innings...he threw 150 innings 2 consecutive years before being drafted, and did not get hurt during that time. Yes, it's a lower level...but here's his innings total: 36 145 146 71

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:13 PM) Fixing that tax code would result in HUGE returns on their tax revenue...probably enough to cover stuff like that. This idea that our government is incapable of doing multiple things at the same time is f***ing insane. Stop making excuses for them. There is no reason they couldn't have done both at the same time...or even more. These are highly paid individuals with more rest time/vacation time on their hands than anyone I know. They also get less done. Then it is a tax increase.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:12 PM) Anyone that claims the former Republican administration in charge was conservative is crazy. They were quite the liberal spenders. Conservatism can never fail. It can only be failed.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:10 PM) Absolute bulls***. They overhauled the entire health code in less time. Keep your liberal minded excuses coming, though...they make for great comedy. And for the record, screw the republicans for blocking tax increases on corporations if that's what they're into doing. Everyone on both sides needs to stop making insane excuses for their "parties". Actually, no, it took 12+ months to overhaul the entire health code, during which time the Democrats had a Supermajority for ~7, after which point they lost it and it took an additional 3 months before they could finish the bill under reconciliation rules. And if you really want to go for it...yes, the explosion in Medicare costs and 50 million uninsured Americans was a much bigger problem than fixing the Tax code, and it will be again when the Court tosses out the PPACA.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 06:03 PM) And finally, "fixing" the tax code isn't raising taxes. It's fixing the tax code. Not according to Grover Norquist, and really, that's all that matters. And seriously, 7 months with a 60 vote majority is not going to give enough time to overhaul the tax code.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:59 PM) Wow, it's a permanent decision for this year according to Merkin. I've never seen anything like this. I'm pretty sure I can go back and find myself having some serious "I told you so"'s on this one and the decision to put Sale in the pen last year.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:54 PM) 3) I never said "tax corporations more", I said fix the tax code so they pay what they should be paying now. Most are paying in the single percentages, and some are paying less than 0%. That's not about being "liberal"...that's about being fiscally sound. The President has repeatedly proposed a tax system overhaul along these lines, including making it a major feature of a state of the union, it will go no where in Congress because it violates the pledge that virtually every Republican has taken that they will never raise taxes, ever, under any circumstance.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:36 PM) It's just great they completely wasted a year of Sale's development last year. Who didn't project some type of injury this season due to not preparing him last year? And you wonder why I kept stressing this was a rebuilding year.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 4, 2012 -> 04:44 PM) I'm not certain why you quoted my post? Your post seemed to imply that the Sun Times was employing him deliberately to be this particular character, rather than just employing him for other reasons but accepting his "characters" as the consequence of doing business.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 4, 2012 -> 04:37 PM) It really depends on who wrote the script and the intent. If an actor is hired to portray a racist, etc. and delivers a credible performance as such, it is wrong to call them a racists. If the Sun Times employs a person to portray a misogynist, then truly, anyone who links to that paper should be embarrassed.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 4, 2012 -> 04:31 PM) Yeah, but that's what makes things so odd... obsessed with foreign nobodies... but ignores Gasol. Krause thought he was king s***. Let's be honest, Kukoc was a decent player, but nothing special. It was all Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, splash some Pippen. Plucking a Dennis Rodman here or there, or a Kerr, those were smart moves, but they were just basketball moves you do to surround the GOAT. OTOH, was it Krause who hired the coach that finally put together an offense that could exploit Jordan?

It's quite hard to get Montero from the Yankees these days. I would probably be convinced by one of their "ranked" guys, Banuelos, Betances, Sanchez, or Williams. I wouldn't make the deal if I wasn't getting something legit back.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 4, 2012 -> 02:12 PM) Both of those guys have been putting up respectable numbers for a couple/few weeks now. Hmph, you're actaully right, Morel's hitting .268 since his low point a couple weeks ago. Just no power at all.

DePauw has a poll out showing the Lugar race turning into a 10 point deficit for the Senator. Lugar sounds like he's desperately begging for help. I seriously don't want to believe you guys will get rid of Senator Lugar.