Balta1701

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 05:00 PM) We could always send Michael Jordan in to calm them down after Kim Jong-il is taken out. Because he's already a nuclear irradiated mutant?

Ryan Theriot is leading off in game 7 of the world series for the home team. Remarkable.

Talks end for the day with no agreement, sticking point is currently still the revenue split.

Josh Hamilton says god told him he'd hit a home run yesterday. But also says that god said nothing about winning the game.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 04:27 PM) I don't know that you can really plan for the trauma an entire country learning their world view wasn't anything close to what they thought it was. Especially if those leaders go down in a "Flash" of glory.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 04:22 PM) Honestly though, assume that happens and for 5 years there is chaos. That would be approximately a gazillion times better than what they have now. Though I suspect that the global community could come in, or even locally South Korea could come in, and keep things steady while they figure it out. Again, absent Kim Jong Il and some military supporters, I don't think there's much animosity towards the south or the rest of the world. Of course that's me making a huge assumption. Maybe they truly do believe the crap he's been brainwashing them with for decades. However...those "military supporters" also have the bomb.

Blinky!

6 years, $24 million guaranteed for Ryan Fitzpatrick.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 02:20 PM) There is no reason to resign Buehrle at all if the sox are just going to remain rather status quo for 2012, reduce their payroll, and wait for some more money to come off the books for 2013 (like Peavy). What is the purpose of Mark Buerhle on a 2 year deal for a team that is built to win 80 games. Well, first of all, if the Sox don't retain Mark, that leaves them with 5 pitchers I'd like to see in the bigs...and that makes it hard to trade Danks. If Danks is then traded, then Stewart becomes starter 5, and to me, that's tantamount to throwing in the towel on the season. That's not an 80 win team. Secondly, if nothing else, we are more competitive with Mark next year than without him. We may only have an outside shot at the division with him, but with the money committed, keeping a guy around we need to have a chance is a fairly low risk, fairly high reward move.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 01:07 PM) "And maybe if they add a couple of more superstars, I'd be interested in coaching them..." "We have a f***ing coach. Go away."

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 01:40 PM) I haven't heard enough about Saladinos defense but I wonder if he's going to be another Dayan where we have to move him around 3248329432 times to fit his bat in somewhere. We may have need of a DH...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 01:43 PM) In all likelihood, at least two of those four aren't going anywhere. CCs deal sounds like it will be done before he even declares. BUT...until those names sort themselves out, there's every reason to think that there is not a "shallow pitching market".

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 01:49 PM) CJ Wilson but your point remains and I agree. You are correct. Replace names. I'm totally frazzled today.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 12:23 PM) Absolutely have to take advantage of the shallow pitching market and move Danks now. How is any market with Captain Cheeseburger, Mark Buehrle, Roy Oswalt, and Colby Lewis as FA's a "Shallow starting pitching market"? That's 3 lefties I'd rather have than Danks.

Gonzo

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 10:32 AM) Hockey season is the biggest problem during their regular season. You're right, I didn't even think of that one. That basically makes a compressed regular season nearly impossible I'd bet.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 10:18 AM) I'd imagine not being able to move it into 7/31/12 will have a lot to do with playing in the individual arenas, who may have booked other events for those times. They'll have that same problem if they try to do a compressed schedule though...teams take road trips or maneuver around concerts during the season anyway. The Bulls Circus Trip is the classic example (although they may miss that portion of the season).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 10:06 AM) So who has game 3 for the Carlos Boozer injury due to the compact schedule/ I have him injured while on this international tour thing. Or while flying back from it, whichever comes first.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 10:02 AM) I'm very curious to see how they're going to fit an 82 game schedule in. Honestly I'd prefer it if they dropped to 62, give everyone an extra 2 weeks of camp, a week of exhibition games, and then start the season. The first few weeks of this "regular" season are going to be brutal. Is there any real reason why the NBA can't wrap up its season on July 31 2012? I mean, there's an olympics in there somewhere but the NBA doesn't need to care about that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 10:01 AM) The difference here is that we are talking about this is a benefit setting. If you want something, you have to prove something back. Don't want to be tested, don't apply for benefits. That is less paternal than most of what we don't have any choice over. Then again I also really believe these types of offerings need to be shrunk majorly anyway, so in a weird sort of way those two things go hand in hand. So...the response to a positive test is to deny various tax credits/exemptions to people who test positive? Why do I immediately feel like this program would do a lot more damage to society than putting drug addicts in jail?

The win probability graph for this game looks like a topographic profile along the strike of the Himalayas.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 09:53 AM) So we don't get more drug addicts Americans to ruin their lives? There are several key leaps here you're making that I question...I'm the "Big government is spectacular" guy here so I'm not going to oppose this on some principle...but I need some reason to think it would be effective. How often are you going to test people? Is it going to be randomly done or scheduled (i.e. when you pay your taxes or soemthing like that)? Wouldn't you basically need an army of people to make nationwide random testing happen? What happens when people test positive, is this going to triple our prison population? How do you respond to the different types of drugs, do you treat powder cocaine differently from crack (as the law currently does), steroids, marijuana, etc.? I'm skeptical that any nationwide measure would "keep addicted Americans from ruining their lives" rather than ruining a lot of people's lives instead.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2011 -> 09:47 AM) I bet we save a factor of 10 times that. What do we do with the people who test positive? Cause if they're going to jail..."Savings" is about the farthest thing from what will happen.

The average cost of a drug test in Florida is $42, according to a quick googling. 300 million people in the country, once per year, $12.6 billion dollars a year for a single drug test round.