Balta1701

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 05:16 PM) They were pretty much done for anyway, but this puts the nails in the coffin. That's going to be an interesting team to watch this offseason. With Crawford being 1 year away from FA and them looking at cost-cutting again (Kazmir), and on the other hand their minors still having a good amount of talent, there are a lot of options for the Rays. I'll bet they're going to gamble on taking the best offer for Crawford and calling up current 22 year old OF Desmond Jennings, who's tearing up AA and now AAA for them this year. Another youngster for their rotation, Wade Davis, just had a solid MLB debut. If they're smart about what they do with Crawford, they can be right in it again next year.

There are 2 reasons why you'd want to keep a guy as a starter in the minors rather than putting him in the pen. 1. You need him to get innings because he's working on his secondary stuff (think, Aaron Poreda) 2. You need him to get innings to build up his arm (Think say John Danks right when we got him, where his arm quit in the 2nd half of 2007). There's some reason to think that Hudson has already worked a fair # of innings since he's been in the 150 range the last couple years, although obviously MLB innings are more difficult. No one here has argued that he needs extra time to work on his stuff. Building up his arm would be a benefit, but it's not like we're talking about a guy who's never pitched 100+ innings before. I think the big benefit for him developmentally might be the chance to start dealing with MLB hitters.

White Sox Press Release:

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 04:49 PM) He can't stay off the DL. i would rather not have him. That's also while playing in the NL and playing the field though. His injuries the last couple years could make him a serious bargain-steal candidate. And frankly, I think our trainers are better than those other teams have working for them, based on the fact that we're always at the top of the league in keeping people healthy/off the DL.

Normal day, will lucky to be home from work by 10:00 p.m. Desperately trying to overcome writer's block.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 04:31 PM) Good counterarguments. If Peavy is healthy and a true No. 1 next year, it certainly will be a major plus. We need a Verlander type if we want to take the next step to greatness instead of mediocrity. I hope he's dominant. The rotation should be Peavy, Mark, Floyd, Danks and Freddy, with a good mix of lefty/righty. I still want MB pitching opening day next year. Not for strategic reasons, but entirely for emotional ones. Peavy can have MB's spot on opening day when he earns a place in my adoring heart.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 04:14 PM) Yup, I"d have remained optimistic til the end had we just kept it w/in four games (five max in loss column) entering all those games with the Tigers. The road trip took care of that. It's amazing we've become a damn good home team; pretty bad road club. It's not that amazing that the team is playing well at home. It was amazing how bad they were playing at home earlier this season. Playing well at home is the norm for most teams.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) Really? I bet most people here are happy with what they have. But you're not. So... I may not have a lot of things, but I'm not willing to destroy my country for 5 million people that things can be fixed another way if they chose to. So, I'm in a very, very large minority.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:39 PM) The New England organization has been very good at getting a return for talent before it's too late (FA,Old age etc) I do find it interesting that they are going to more 4-3. I thought 3-4 was where most of the league wanted to be? If NE is doing something the bears do, then that makes me feel better about the Bears decision to stay 4-3 so long. Here's an interesting article http://bleacherreport.com/articles/249115-...cover-2-defense (bleacher report fwiw) but he makes a good point about the Steelers switching to a 4-3 cover 2 once LeBeau retires, because that is what Mike Tomlin is familiar with as a D coordinator in minny and Dbacks coach in Tampa. Something like 12 teams are going to be running a base 3-4 IIRC. The real rub is...you need certain types of players to make it work. You need a very strong LB Corps and you need that ridiculous run-stopping DT in the middle. There are only so many of those DT's around that can fit in that system. As more teams switch, the advantage to switching will go down unless you already have the players.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:36 PM) Funny. I don't consider myself wealthy. Then you've somehow gotten things for you a lot better than I have. Or than a lot of us have. Congrats. Now why should we not have that chance?

Tampa Bay loses Carlos Pena for the year with broken fingers. HBP on his hand.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:34 PM) I love the assumption that government will actually cut costs... Sure they will, if they destroy service and choice. And considering the lack of choice and poor service for anyone but the wealthiest that is part of our current system, that's a chance I'm willing to take.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:14 PM) LMAO. I get it. Government baby! Everything private destroys the wealth of everything else. Gotta transfer that health, I mean wealth somehow! Based on your argument, if the government instituted a $10,000 a year tax on every small business employee and used some portion of that money to create jobs, that would be something you'd love to support. Because you're arguing that health insurers doing exactly that is a wonderful thing. Since the health sector is growing, we shouldn't touch it, regardless of the impact on everyone else.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 03:01 PM) I am hoping that 2010 sees better resultys. Wer know that KW has long coveted Alex Rios. He has him now, Rios doesn't have a good history. One pretty good year meant the Jays shelled out $60M and he has underperformed I'd say Rios has a pretty good history. 2 all star appearances, both of them deserved, at age 25/26, a good but not stellar 2008 campaign, and a crappy 2009, after 2 years of development.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:47 PM) The point is it's the one area in the private sector consistently adding jobs. So, let's have the government take control of it too... which will then make the negative even more negative. Woot! If the health care sector is adding jobs at the expense of the rest of the economy, then having the government take it over would do exactly that. Thus creating a positive. You're missing the metaphor here. Just because something is adding jobs doesn't mean that it benefits the economy as a whole. The continued expansion of health expenditures is a stranglehold on consumer spending and job growth everywhere else except in the health care sector.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:43 PM) The government adding jobs while the private sector bleeds is a zero sum (or in fact negative) game. And the health care industry adding jobs while the private sector bleeds is not a negative game?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:29 PM) According to the scoreboard, his last 20 outings, he has an ERA of 2.50. The outing before that streak was when he gave up 4 runs. He hasn't been that bad since late July, I will grant.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:26 PM) Let's go ahead and kill the one industry that's still adding jobs. That way, the government owns everything. The government is adding jobs as well, yet you guys want to shrink the size of government. Your argument implies that since the government is adding jobs, we shouldn't do anything to limit its growth. Just like we shouldn't do anything to hurt the health care industry, it's adding jobs! Sure, higher taxes and higher health care costs may kill jobs elsewhere, but that's unimportant.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:13 PM) And yet you are running around with the same blind support of this administration that used to drive you so nuts before. Ironic, isn't it. Not on the unemployment numbers I haven't. I'm pretty sure I've been arguing that they're still worse than what you're quoting and that they're no where near catching the magnitude of the hit that the American job market has taken. Plus, they're not likely to come back since we've so drastically overbuilt housing and we're not investing nearly enough in growth (green) industries. Hence that whole U6 discussion that Mr_g and I had. And since we're so willing to protect the health insurance companies, we're making sure small business stays dead and the sick stay bankrupt.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 02:10 PM) Oh I get the point... we are doubting the honesty of this administration. Oh Horrible Republicans. And yet, you scoffed when I applied that same doubt to the man of God we had running things before this.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) He's actually had 2 good outings in a row I think. I didn't get to see either on TV so I can't comment on how he looked. How did he look aside from the good results?? Came in with a runner on base, induced what could have been a GIDP, and then struck out the next 2.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 01:50 PM) Holliday is at $20MM per yr or so. I'll be surprised if he gets quite that much, although I could see him matching the deal Carlos Lee got (100/6)

On another topic, there's a case coming up before the Supreme Court this week that we ought to keep an eye on. The court looks like there's a reasonable shot that it will declare all limits on corporate campaign finance spending illegal. That happens, and the joke of Joe Biden being D-MBNA becomes a lot closer to true for all 536 of them.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2009 -> 01:34 PM) Nice. They revised the numbers. Not me, not us, the government. I think you are b****ing up the wrong thread. You're missing the point of my B****ing.

Mark!