Balta1701

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 11:56 AM) For a minute, I thought I was in the Diamond Club and I was really excited. MLB has a CBA negotiation coming up this December. It'd be stupid for the owners not to push for that. If nothing else...it covers their own tails...they don't wind up signing a player for big money and then have them break down because of the HGH usage. And..."We don't want to be tested for HGH" is a losing position if you have to take it in front of the public.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 11:43 AM) Applying for credit too frequently will lower it regardless of balance however. At the time you sign up for them yes...but then within a year or two it'll go the other way, because the fraction of your available credit you're using will have gone down.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 10:05 AM) Give or take, yes. And look carefully at what I said - PART of it. That means a whole lot of baby boomers started retiring around age 45-55 though.

Gavin Floyd put up the 26th best ERA in the AL last season and the 29th most innings...while pitching in a hitters park. I don't know about top 20, but absolutely top 30.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:58 AM) Keep in mind too that some of that drop has been predicted for decades, because of the baby boomers retiring. Starting around 2000 though?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:58 AM) I fixed that for you. No one cares what anyone thinks about any given issue except for the five security council countries with veto power. And even then it usually doesn't matter. They have the money and the means to effect what the UN does, so this idea that it's some global governmental body is a joke. I think the only ones who say the UN is some sort of global governmental body are the conspiracy theorists who say that the US government is going to be replaced with an evil global government. The UN is an instrument through which nations undertake complicated foreign policy and diplomatic maneuvers, and even the small nations out there have found significant benefit from its existence.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:49 AM) I agree, which means that 95% of the time it's a PR stunt for countries to be able to say "ohhh! Look what we did! We passed a RESOLUTION, so they'll stop. Will place some sanctions on them. They'll stop!! Of course, if they break 17 of these resolutions, it won't matter, but we passed a RESOLUTION!" The whole thing is a joke. If countries felt strong enough to go after a dictator who is ruthlessly killing his people then they can build a coalition and go for it. They don't need to waste their time with the UN. The UN is whatever the world decides it is. The UN has exactly as much credibility as the world decides it has. And whether you like it or not...in the 60+ years since it was created, the UN has done enough good in the world that it does have a fair amount of credibility, even with people who oppose the UN with regularity. If countries decide to work outside the UN, that is their prerogative...but then other countries have a similar right to work within the UN to stop them, and to use the fact that they're working within the UN to their advantage.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:31 AM) Well, he was on the Yankees top 10 prospect list a few years back FWIW At a time when the Yankees system was pretty barren after the top guys. That's like saying a guy made the White Sox's top 10 prospect list right now. Maybe if he's at the top of the list that means something...but the 8-10 spots are pretty iffy.

QUOTE (Springfield SoxFan @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:02 AM) Marquez does have some pretty solid spring numbers, but I'm still skeptical about him, I would surmise that his numbers were solid against AAAA players in the spring. I wonder if KW is still working on a deal. Marquez has zero trade value, effectively. He's coming off an injury, a DFA/waiver wire candidate, and he's never really established himself as a decent prospect.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 09:05 AM) This is true. However, of the 70 or so games he pitches in, how many leads are relatively comfortable? Don't get me wrong I still a starting pitcher is more valuable in general. However I think the closer role is more important than some people give it credit for. The actual "save" stat is useless for the reason you stated above, however the impact of effecting the outcome of twice as many games as a starter does have it's merit. Well, last year Bobby Jenks pitched in 24 games where the game was within 1 run or tied, another 10 where the game was within 2 runs. So, only 34 actual "Close games". ANd of course, a handful of those games were close because Jenks came in with bigger leads than that and gave up several runs.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 07:29 AM) I know, let's all go live in a f***ing cave, sell everything you have that have any amounts of carbon footprints in it at all, and most importantly, get off the computer. That will solve all of the world's problems, since we're all either going to die from CO2 or nuclear or bulls*** overload. Kap, I think LF's sig is the appropriate reply.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 08:35 AM) Even though they effect the outcome of twice as many games as a starter? "Affect the outcome" is a relative term though...because in quite a few of those, the closer comes in and pitches the 9th inning with a fairly comfortable lead and still winds up with the save.

This is kinda a scary graph.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 05:45 PM) Maybe if the Mets canned Minaya long ago when he'd already proven worthless instead of letting him try to cover up terrible signing after terrible signing they wouldn't have wound up in such a mess. The teams have nothing to blame but themselves. A lot of those teams you see with issues (Mets, Dodgers, Tigers) overspent on bad rosters. The Mets also have the whole Madoff thing.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 06:40 PM) Again, so resolutions are worthless. I agree. They're worth exactly as much as the people pushing for them decide that they're worth.

Those are some incredibly fun edits in your Blix quotes. For an example...it refers to Iraq having "Misplaced" several thousand tons of VX...it suggests that Iraq is clearly hiding anthrax...here is what Blix actually says. Here are Blix's exact words on Iraq's cooperation: He then goes on to ask for "months" to complete the work. If you want to stand by and say we invaded Iraq because of bad bookkeeping in the 1980's on their part...go ahead. That just illustrates how insane the whole war was.

LAT

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 02:53 PM) The Finnish reactor is being built for a fixed cost of $4.1b, though there is currently arbitration lawsuits filed by both sides to contest an additional $1-2b. That's still well below your $10b+. Because they started it in the early 2000's. The price has soared since. "Today" there being 2009, with prices doubling every couple years.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 07:25 AM) Huh, imagine that, another article with costs well below $10b/reactor even after cost overruns. You're not helping your case. And having to cut corners and cut back on safety to do it. And that was 2 years ago.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 24, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) Interesting since this is precisely what happened in the Iraq war. Resolutions were past, Saddam continued breaking them, and the UN failed to enforce anything until Bush decided enough was enough. We learned later that he had gotten rid of most of the WMD's we (and others) thought he had, but that's hindsight for you. [note: that's not an argument for/against the war, so lets not open that bag] Let's be 100% specific...he was declared in material breach of resolution 1554 because the U.S. was given the right to declare him in material breach for virtually anything...including not having complete enough documentation that it had destroyed its weapons. Iraq was required to hand over all of its documents regarding its weapons programs and submit to full inspections. In early December 2002, Iraq handed over somewhere over 10,000 documents. Based on the fact that those documents were incomplete and did not show things that U.S. intelligence believed to be true, Iraq was declared in breach of 1554. However, Iraq was declared in breach of resolution 1554 based on U.S. intelligence...intelligence that was false. The way the resolution was written, the U.S. alone was given the right to determine whether Iraq was in material breach of the resolution, and no other country was given the right to challenge that determination. The U.S. made that determination before the inspectors hit the ground, based on the fact that Saddam's document declaration did not show things that U.S. intelligence *Knew* to be true about Iraq's weapons program. In other words, the U.S. declared Iraq in breach of 1554 based on false intelligence. The inspectors hit the ground in early 2003 and were in fact given unfettered access to Iraq's weapons sites. They found nothing that hadn't been declared before and that the items sealed when the 1998 inspectors were moved out had not been touched and were covered with 5 years of dust. They did find some missiles that were in breach of treaty obligations, and Iraq allowed the inspectors to destroy those missiles. The inspectors reported, repeatedly, that they had a complete record of compliance from the Iraqis, they found no evidence Iraq had restarted its weapons programs, and they found no evidence of Iraqi storage of older banned weapons. Iraq was declared in breach of 1554 based on U.S. intelligence statements. Iraq was judged to be deceiving the inspectors based on U.S. intelligence estimates. Those estimates could not be reviewed by any outside group or challenged by Iraq. The declaration that Iraq was in breach, and the full invasion, was motivated by intelligence that was complete B.S. Iraq did not continue defying resolution 1554, except in the sense that the U.S. was allowed to declare that they were defying it.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 23, 2011 -> 07:22 PM) I was never into running, but you're right that it is kind of addicting. I'm tired as hell when I'm done, but I'm rearing to go again in a few hours (sex joke in there). I don't think I get the same release of endorphins with cycling as I do with running. My Knees get so damn angry.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Mar 23, 2011 -> 09:38 PM) That's a prerequisite in our part of the country, Balta. Last time I was in this part of the country, they couldn't do that.

QUOTE (striker @ Mar 23, 2011 -> 08:26 PM) Where in my statement did I draw a conclusion? This is called planning. AJ having a bad year and Flowers having a good year is a scenario There is little/no case right now where I'd think aggressively moving Flowers upwards is a good idea. If Castro or AJ were to get hurt and Flowers were raking at AAA, perhaps I'd consider it, but if he's having a good year...let him have a good year.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 23, 2011 -> 09:12 PM) And we increased our payroll by how much from 2010 to 2011? About $20 million, depending on how you book Ramirez's salary and any insurance settlement for Peavy.