Balta1701

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 11:02 AM) Are we at the stage where we speculate running mates? Romney aaaand...? What do ya'll think? Rubio.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 11:03 AM) I have no idea what to expect in that game. On the one hand I could see Illinois getting blown out of the gym like they did at Purdue. I can also see them gutting out a tough win like they did against Northwestern. It does, seem, however that Indiana's shooting is coming back down to earth the last few weeks. So that'll help. This is the big ten. I'm stunned any time any team gets blown out of the water. (I mean, ok, not stunned every time, but you get the point. In this league, the #8 team can beat the #1 team on a decent day).

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 10:57 AM) I'm trying to find a statistic and was going to see if anyone can help. I'm trying to look up what Kobe's record was scoring 40+ per game (W/L) and what Jordan's record was scoring 40+. It could take some time but you could probably do it just with the Basketball-reference.com game logs for both. If you're going to spend 20 minutes searching, you'll save time if you give up and do it yourself. You could export each season into Excel, sort by "Points", and then compile W's and L's for every game where ach is above 40.

QUOTE (The Gooch @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 10:58 AM) I know that 49ers vs Baltimore would be the best story (Harbaugh vs Harbaugh), but what two teams do you all thing would make for the most interesting Superbowl to watch? My favorite team left is the 49ers and I want them to go, but I think NE vs Giants would be the most interesting. I think the Giants have the best chance of keeping up with NE and I like the fact that it would be a Super Bowl rematch from when NY spoiled NE's perfect season. Its funny the way the NFL works, I like New England's chances and this is not one of the better teams they have put out there in the past 7 or 8 years. I really don't care about the "Subplots", so I think the only game I might really not enjoy is 49ers vs. Baltimore, because I don't know if either of those QB's would be able to move the ball against the opposing defense. That said, that'd be one solid defensive struggle.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 10:50 AM) Thanks to the list I picked up the latest Wilco CD, much better than I expected. Still deciding if there's any song on it I really like, but it's their best whole album work since Yankee Hotel Foxtrot.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 09:46 AM) Then what was the point for KW to have 6 starting pitchers heading into 2006? At that point in time, it was marketed as having a huge competitive advantage over the rest of the league.... Because the Sox were willing to put Brandon McCarthy in the bullpen for the full season if that was the best situation to win games. Out of Danks, Floyd, Jackson, Peavy, Humber, and Sale, there's no one where it makes good baseball sense to consign them to the bullpen. Danks obviously makes no sense with a shiny new extension. Jackson a 1 year, $8-10 million bullpen pitcher makes no sense, that's huge money for a reliever. Peavy is even more expensive, and if you move him to the pen, you lose any chance of saving money on him by moving him at the deadline. Floyd moving to the pen reduces the value in the very asset you're trying to trade. Humber and Sale are the only 2 obvious bullpen candidates. You might do exactly that if you were "All in", but we're not. We're trying to recover from a failed all-in campaign, and that means we need to maximize the value we have in those guys, which means turning them into starters/keeping them starters. Putting Sale in the bullpen was a huge competitive advantage for the pen last year, but it was a move that was not a good long-term move. Putting McCarthy in the pen in 06 was the same way.

Link

I'd say I'm pointing out all of the above.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 09:33 AM) That's why the only way something like this works is if you go out and sign Jackson first and then look into dealing Floyd. There would be two issues with such a series of moves. First, you may need to temporarily go over budget to pull it off. While there would be no real financial repercussions as long as you moved Floyd before you had to start paying him, I still don't see Reinsdorf giving Williams the ok to do this. Second, you'd lose some leverage in the Floyd talks, since teams would know we'd have to move a starter before opening day. I'd be fine with that, as I like Jackson more than Floyd and anything you could get for Floyd would simply be a bonus. If demand was right, you'd sill get a pretty decent package for him. I really think there is some logic to the idea, I just don't think our organization has the balls to do what it takes to pull it off. Then you've got the other backwards problem...where everyone knows "This team will not keep both of these pitchers and they absolutely must trade 1 of them." Thus, I don't need to offer a spectacular offer to get Gavin Floyd out of Chicago. They'd be in a position where they're choosing between taking the best available offer on Floyd or putting Sale or Humber in the bullpen and possibly screwing over another valuable asset. I'd respond to the Sox doing that by cutting any offer I have on the table for Floyd in half.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 02:52 AM) Payroll for the Twins is right around $98-99 million...not so far from where the White Sox are, right? B-R has them penciling in at just over $110 million when you count arbitration cases.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 09:24 AM) I say we sign Soler and Cerpedes If Soler truly is that 5 tool guy in the making, we would have an excellent spot for him out in CF as early as next season. Cerpedes can be inserted in LF for the start of the 2012 season if signed. Suddenly our team would be very Cuban Really, I wouldn't project these guys, especially Soler, to be ready that soon.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 05:31 AM) Perhaps there's some pitching coach out there who has detected a flaw with Floyd and he thinks he's just an easy adjustment or two from being the same caliber of pitcher he was on a consistent basis in 2008. But unless you're Kenny Williams, you don't give up guys who project to be legit big leaguers on a "my pitching coach can fix this player" trades. especially when that player is already due $10 million over the next 2 years.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 16, 2012 -> 02:36 AM) What about trading Gavin Floyd and signing Roy Oswalt on a one-year deal for $8 million? That would be basically revenue neutral...excise $9.5 million more for the 2013 budget and bring in another name pitcher to go with Peavy who could actually help boost or bolster attendance a bit. He snaps back and they've got a VERY valuable trade chip at midseason who can be parlayed into additional prospects, with Castro/Stewart/Molina/Axelrod/Santiago joining the big league rotation at the time of the trade. Again it's the same problem...if I'm boston, why would I want to give up enough prospect-wise to get Gavin Floyd when I can just sign Edwin Jackson or Roy Oswalt and also be able to keep nice precious prospects?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 10:06 PM) I did say SC would be his wall, but I guess I thought he'd try that state first. Not surprising in any case. Too bad though. Huntsman's dropping and endorsement is only a very small help for Mitt in SC and FL, but could be more so in NV. Mittens wasn't really worried about Nevada was he? At least not to the point where the endorsement of another mormon will suddenly make the difference.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 09:44 PM) I do agree that the Oney issue seemed to be the turning point There might have bene something beforehand, but that's when this viewer really started seeing it.

Huntsman to withdraw from the GOP race and endorse Mittens.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 08:58 PM) I see that it is narrated by Edward Herrmann, the guy who narrates basically everything on the History channel and is also Richie Rich's dad. The ad I just posted? Lithgow.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 08:12 PM) As an impartial NFL fan I'm disappointed to not see a Brady vs Brees/Rodgers Super Bowl. THis isn't the NBA.

A loophole in the law has set it up so that networks can't block politically based ads in the time before en election. If you have an election within 45 days of the Super Bowl, you're going to be getting a wonderful ad featuring aborted fetuses. During the Super Bowl.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 07:47 PM) Id put New England in that category as well Damnit, i wrote packers and meant to wtire Patriots.

I know the Giants season numbers aren't there, but the only team out of the remaining 4 that you'd say "This team is big on offense and weak on defense" is the Patriots. The rest of those teams have lost.

Maybe the Packers should have spent more time playing football and less time double checking discounts. The 2 weeks off really haven't helped.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jan 15, 2012 -> 07:31 PM) What a joke of a roughing the passer penalty. The officiating this game has been atrocious favoring Green Bay. Fortunately it doesnt appear the refs will be able to do enough to blow this game for the Giants. Yup.