Balta1701

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2010 -> 01:26 PM) Many of the suggestions have included Buehrle and Konerko. Konerko, true. Buehrle's not moving. Even if he was, he's a LHP and Oswalt isn't.

QUOTE (chw42 @ May 22, 2010 -> 12:32 PM) But I think a lot of people realize that the Nats are still an anomaly. Even if they do add two pretty good starters soon, I don't think their bullpen or the offense is good enough to get them a wild card. Both their offense and their pitching are in the bottom 1/3 of the NL.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 21, 2010 -> 11:28 PM) Well if the Sox want to be sellers, they just got some competition. The Sox aren't selling an expensive starting pitcher or a 1b or a $20 million DH though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2010 -> 01:24 PM) So just like the USA, well minus the jobs and such. And except for the whole deportion thing.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2010 -> 01:05 PM) The worst time you can go to the Taste is later. If you can get there early, around lunch time, the crowds are pretty tame. It gets so insanely crowded during the nights it is impossible to really do too much. It's all about how you plan, IMO. Typically, what I'll do, and what I plan to do again this year, is head up there on the train pre-lunch. Grab lunch at Taste, then take a walk for a few hours down Michigan Ave, shop or whatever, then wander my way back to Grant Park around dinner time. Especially if you've grabbed some extra tickets in the morning so you don't have to wait in that line again, you're in good shape, even on the busy days. There's also usually more than a few free events/shows/concerts at the Taste. I'm hitting the XRT show on the 4th most years also.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2010 -> 01:08 PM) Also last I heard, they had canceled the fireworks show. http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/2014794...-012710.article They canceled the big fireworks show on the 3rd. There is another, smaller show on the 4th. I'll be there for that.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 21, 2010 -> 05:08 PM) Yeah, they might have to give up a cell phone, a text plan, cable, whatever, but so what? It's available. Your cell phone costs you $25,000 a year?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 21, 2010 -> 07:05 PM) http://mcclintock.house.gov/2010/05/respon...-calderon.shtml Nice of him to ignore the immigration reform Mexico did last year. Mexico now has essentially no penalties for illegal immigration.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 22, 2010 -> 01:09 PM) They must need more regulations.... Or, to parody your side...they need a bigger check made out to them. You must be happy you have a stellar politician like Rand Paul making your side look so impressive these days.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ May 21, 2010 -> 08:57 PM) For what the Bulls are looking for, I also agree that Henry should be the target. With that said, I think he doesn't last that far down. So next step would be James Anderson or Avery Bradley to me. Do the Bulls have a 2nd round pick they could use to move up a few slots?

Ok, I'll admit, I tuned in for the last part of that one too.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 21, 2010 -> 09:41 PM) I hate to say it, but I really hope so. Conservatives, rooting against America since Jan 20, 2009.

BP checks the list of available dispersants. Finds one that a subsidiary company of its own produces. Checks the stats on that dispersant. Sees it is not the most effective dispersant. Sees it is much more toxic than other available dispersants. Begins purchasing and deploying massive quantities of that dispersant anyway. EPA turns its head for a month. EPA finally gets its head out of its arse earlier this week, after a lot of prodding from media/sciencey types who were saying "BP is using a more toxic dispersant than it needs to and it could be using better, more modern ones!" EPA orders BP to find another dispersant. Meanwhile, CNN finds a warehouse in Texas holding a few hundred thousand gallons of a less toxic, more effective dispersant, just sitting there. BP tells the EPA to s***w off, they'll use whatever dispersant they damn well please, it's their gulf anyway.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) What I am advocating is that if you don't think he is ready this year, you wait until June of next year to bring him up.... I guess I rejected that idea because of the next step of thought...how much does it cost to get you to June of next year to bring him up? Now, we're not just talking about the $4 million that we're spending on AJ...we're talking about having Donny Lucy as our only catcher next year until we're ready to bring Flowers up. In other words, we're probably out on the market trying to find at least 1 catcher, probably 2, just to give us a reasonable start to the year. Miguel Olivo's contract with the Rockies was a $2.5 million deal last offseason, Jason Kendall's deal was 2 years/$4 million, so the going rate for a veteran catcher of AJ's caliber is at least going to be around $3 million. So now we're talking a cost of $7 million+ to keep Flowers in AAA until next June. By my Math, I figured we might be having on the order of $10-$15 million to spend on FA's next offseason to fill holes, assuming no savings from dealing anyone this year. Keeping Flowers in AAA looks to me like the difference between having $15 million to play with and perhaps around $8 million to play with. Or $17 million and $10 million. Whatever.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 21, 2010 -> 04:34 PM) I think I speak for most Republicans when I say I'd just rather they all die so me and my fellow white males can play golf and smoke cigars in peace. Also, they dirty my shoes. I do not like it. Minus the sarcasm, which do you prefer. Paying more to put people in jail or paying less to put families on welfare?

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 04:26 PM) Well, you may end up spending that money indirectly by bringing him up early then. Bringing him up this June, if he's indeed not ready, and starting his arbitration clock, might well cost you $4 million or more in the future. My guess is those that advocate trading AJ this year are not expecting huge things for us next season. So it isn't as though having Flowers on the roster for an entire year next season is going to have any far-reaching implications on our success next year. By bringing up Flowers before he is ready, you are inefficiently managing his service time, which can be far more devastating financially than paying AJ to stick around this year... There is essentially zero difference in service time between bringing Flowers up on June 2 and breaking camp with Flowers next year. Once you get to the start of June, you've saved yourself that arbitration year in all cases. (That's why cheap organizations like the Sox and Nationals wait until early June to bring up guys like Beckham and Strasbourg) The only reason to keep Flowers down after June 1, for financial reasons, is if you don't think he'll be ready until June 1 of 2011. If you think he's that bad right now, then yeah, hold onto AJ and be prepared to spend money on another catcher next offseason.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 04:21 PM) Regardless, he will be missed for his contributions, but if you truly believe Flowers is ready, than you've got to move on, especially considering the difference in salaries. Frankly, I'm pretty sure he's not yet ready, but I'm not willing to spend another $4 million to keep him in the minors after June 1st.

I think you guys are missing a lot of the other negative consequences of your actions. No matter how good foster parents are, you're still ripping apart a family, which is traumatic for both children and parents on its own, and which of course in a lot of cases winds up correlating just as much with another generation of substance abuse, crime, and government interventions. You're hating doing anything that would give people a governmetn bailout, like health care or a roof over their heads, but what do you think is going to happen to those people when you put them out on the street? You're going to be footing an even larger bill for them once they get locked up in jail. You're talking about being much more aggressive in taking children away from parents, which is a very difficult thing for the government to do at any level, because having the government declare people unfit parents is a pretty major step. Heck, statistics show it also doesn't work, to a staggering degree All this because you feel angry about your money going to poor people.

There's one other thing you have to keep in mind...he's a free agent at the end of this season, unless we want to offer him another $6 million+ next year before the season starts. So when you say things like, his knowledge of the game will be missed and his fire will be missed... You may well be right. But that was going to happen anyway.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:51 PM) Well I don't think trading AJ or holding on to him for the remainder of the year necessitates much of anything for this team. If need be, they can deal him for a B level prospect or two and give Flowers some PT. If not, they're spending money that isn't really going to mean much in the grand scheme of things. The way I look at it: Trading AJ Pierzynski at the start of June creates as much salary savings as trading Konerko at the end of July, and probably more salary savings than you'd get by dumping Jenks. Trading AJ at the start of June pays something like 75% of Linebrink's contract next year.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:45 PM) Is that the silly 10/5 date for AJ or whatever? Yup. After June 13th, AJ Pierzynski essentially has a full no trade clause, and so far, he's indicated he'd use it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:41 PM) LOL. What a shock! They were FORCED TO GET JOBS like the rest of us. Or...they went off welfare because they found jobs.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:38 PM) I think Kenny will wait another month or so before these types of statements start being made. He can't. He has a June 13th deadline.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:37 PM) Who says the state can't intervene? If you're a f***ed up junkie parent who can't get a job you shouldn't just be paid to have children so the state stays away. Great. So where are you putting the kids? In that huge pool of foster families that are out there, right? So now the kids are getting bailed out by the government, the foster family is getting paid by the government to take them, and you're angry because your tax dollars are going to deal with other people's problems and because the kids are still being taught that the government will bail them out if they screw up.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ May 21, 2010 -> 03:15 PM) Yeah except for the fact that he said neither, but then your argument wouldnt work as well so I get why you do did that So, let's see, you've got 2 kids living with an unemployed, hell let's say substance addicted parent. His argument is that those kids need to learn that they can't get by on government handouts. So, what exactly should be done? The mother isn't going to provide for them, clearly. You can't have the state intervene; that teaches them that the state will intervene. So what else is left?