Balta1701

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 06:13 PM) I approve of this message. At this stage, even I agree.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 06:06 PM) I haven't heard anything about an injury until now for Dye. Where does it say he's injured? I think that the "Hurting" probably refers to his pride.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 06:06 PM) There's a few actually, the Indiana Dem bench is surprisingly deep. Wouldn't be surprised to see Donnelly named to that nod. Either way though...this isn't going to be a good year to be running as a Democrat. I'm not even sure I'm motivated to vote for them right now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 06:03 PM) Nice projection there. Obviously since I posted it, I must not only believe it, but fully endorse it. Still turning everything into what you want I see. So, you posted that and suggested it could be a reason why he'd retire, and yet you believe it's fully ok? (FWIW, I'd imagine there are probably worse stories out there somewhere in the Congress. Like it or not, those folks have to spend probably 2/3 of their time or more out of their home state, between fundraisers and actually being in Congress)

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 05:26 PM) This could also be Bayh's problem. http://frugalhoosiers.com/?p=7023 I assume you also have a problem with corporations that exist as mailboxes in Bermuda? Or with Dan Coates?

You're comfortable with that? Let me put it another way. If the end of the season came, and I told you that there were 5 games over the course of the season where we wound up having 2 infielders hurt, would you say "That's it, our season's gone" or would you say "Well, that's not half bad, I'm glad we didn't suffer too many major injuries". There have been times in the last few years where we've had as many as 3 IF's go down or get tossed during a single game. THat's how JD wound up playing SS in 2005. I'm just not sure I buy that you can count on a 44 year old to be your only backup IF. I think you have to go with an 11 man pitching staff and keep the extra IF if you bring in Damon and still hold onto Kotsay.

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 03:31 PM) I think at that point you trade Kotsay during spring training for a backup IF. Who's going to give up a backup IF and take on $1 million for Kotsay? And a lesser but noteable point, who backs up 1b then? Konerko isn't as spry as he was in 2005 when our backup was Timo/Offday.

A general question I was thinking about Re: Damon. Hypothetically let's assume the Sox sign him. That makes our bench/DH rotation Vizquel, Kotsay, Jones, Damon, and Castro, if they go with 12 pitchers. (12 pitchers, 8 everyday players, 5 man bench/DH rotation). Are people comfortable with a 44 year old Omar Vizquel being our only backup IF for 3 separate positions? At least to my eyes, we're pretty much required to carry either CJ or Nix just so we have 2 backups to cover the IF. That limits us to an 11 man pitching staff, and I'm not sure the org would be thrilled about that. Anyway, you don't avoid signing Damon because of that, but I'd say it ought to be something they think about beforehand.

QUOTE (MattZakrowski @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 03:00 PM) I don't trust that idea based on Canada's cauldron construction skills. Maybe the next time China hosts the olympics, we'll see something like that.

Actually, there's legitimate science behind this...if you model the traffic/people flow patterns, this legitimately winds up being the fastest way to board a plane.

NBC reporting that Bayh gave Reid a nice middle finger also, didn't bother calling him until well after the announcement.

I couldn't find the general sports thread so I decided to bump this once I found it.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 11:58 AM) Per Josh Marsall The suggestion is out there in the ether that the end result will be the Indiana Democratic party choosing a candidate, just with no primary, so it might not be an upposed Republican in November. Not 100% sure on that so don't quote me.

The deadline to file to run for the Senate in Indiana is this Friday. Thanks Evan. Really gives us a lot of time to recruit a top tier contender.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 11:24 AM) I agree. Another thing we have to consider is clutch hitting. I'm pretty sure the Sox were last in the AL with runners in scoring position last year. Can someone verify this for me? How many times did we see runners on 2nd or 2nd AND 3rd with less than 2 outs left stranded? Too many to count. . We were 7th in MLB last year with a .253 average with RISP and 2 outs (Minny was 12th). #22 in total chances with RISP and 2 outs. We were 13th in MLB in batting average with RISP in general, hitting .265 in those cases. The issue with the offense is we were 26th in MLB in at bats with RISP. We did ok when we got people on and over...we just got as many RISP as Baltimore and K.C..

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 11:02 AM) FOr the record, I am not a huge fan of him either (I remember the story told on here about how much of a D-Bag he is). Just making the argument that sometimes it's better to have someone on your side, even if he isnt completely with you. I wonder, having watched the last year, whether Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, and similar folks have done more to hurt the Democratic party than they would have had they been outright republicans saying 100% no on everything. We're in this funny zone right now where the people who benefit from no action on anything are the people who currently have all the money, and pretty much any change would wind up hurting them.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 10:48 AM) Seems like the more we see him the better he gets. Verlander's ERA vs. Sox: 2009: 1.40 2008: 5.83 2007: 3.60 2006: 7.82 That's one possible way to look at it. One other plausible way to look at it is to say that we do a lot better against him when we field a winning team.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:30 AM) The greedy part I can sort of get, and wouldn't even protest much - though the same applies to most business fields. Evil? Please. Nevermind that most people at most of firms in the financial sector are by nature conservative and very, very careful about accounting. If they weren't, they'd all have a shelf life of about 5 to 10 years. I'm pretty sure most of these guys have been around longer than that. That assumes that things haven't changed in the last 10 years or so. I think the simplest question in response is...if these folks are so careful about accounting, then how did they accidentally miss an $8 trillion housing bubble in the U.S. (and, as is now becoming apparent, have the same thing happen in country after country. Dubai, Greece, Spain, etc.) My explanation is that they didn't miss it...but that we've set up a system that provides strong incentives for short-term gains but no downside for intermediate or long-term losses. Thus, we've incentivized having Wall Street creating bubbles and taking huge profits on the way up, while someone else takes the losses on the way down.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 10:04 AM) One thing I'm fairly certain of is Verlander will win about 5 or 6 games against us since we have no one in our lineup that can do much against him. AJ is 14/42 against Verlander with a .968 career OPS. Quentin is 6/20 with a .917. Rios is 3/7 career against him, Pierre went 2/3 against him.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:14 AM) Hilarious that you can even post the last line with a straight face, and then recommend that the federal government get involved. The Kings of running fundamentally flawed, inefficient, contracting coverage and worse productive plans across the spectrum. Except in the case of health care, where the private providers dominate the Feds in those categories.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:13 AM) I prefer to be in the latter category myself. Then you'd never make it on Wall Street.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:10 AM) It should be obvious that it will have some effect - the Dome was such a unique playing field, this has to be a big change. They've made some personnel changes that will help them, but that won't remove the transition period, where they will be as new to it as the other teams. They'll figure it out, but I think 2010 will be less successful than it otherwise would be for the Twins, in terms of defense and pitching. That means fewer wins. I've stated it in other threads but I'll repeat it here again...the numbers for the Twins pitching staff last year argue against this. Most teams on average pitch quite a bit better at home than on the road, between knowing the stadium, mound, and being in their own beds, etc. Last year, this simply wasn't true for the Twins starters. They were some of the worst in the league at home and some of the best in the league on the road. The Twins starters really struggled at home. I'm of the opinion that the Transition period you refer to for the Twinkies, esp. for their pitching staff, is going to be very short, and compared to last year, moving out of the dome is likely to help their starters.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:06 AM) Think of it this way - the EU is like a holding company with multiple, independently-run business units. If you are an executive at the parent company, which would you rather have reviewed: a "selection" of the books that each unit chooses to send you, or the ability to review the full financial picture? Seems pretty obvious to me. Depends on how profitable they appear to be (see: AIGFP).

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:04 AM) I didnt say they did care about ruffling feathers. Then its not a difficult policy for them to enforce.

Can you cite for me any bit of evidence suggesting anything other than a negative correlation between Health Care outcomes and increasing insurance company profitability? If, hypothetically, I were to reject the contention that profitability for its own sake is the greatest good possible and instead were to believe that the goal of the medical industry was health care, and the free market system actually worked in this industry, then you should have no problem demonstrating that to me. If insurers are more profitable and the system is working, then either they should be improving efficiency, expanding coverage, or producing overall better health care outcomes. If insurers are more profitable and the system is fundamentally broken, then they may be less efficient, contracting coverage, and producing worse overall health care outcomes.