Balta1701

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ May 2, 2009 -> 08:34 AM) I don't know if the question is this black and white (and even if it is, it's not because have space doesn't guarantee you'd get either guy at all), but I'd rather have Chris Bosh or Amar'e Stoudemire long term starting in 2010-2011 than I would Ben Gordon long term starting this fall. If the salary cap goes down as far as I think it's going to, the only way we're going to have the space to go after one of those guys is to: 1. Move Hinrich for at least $3-4 million worth of deals that expire next year (aka we can take back a longer contract, but not for more than the MLE). 2. Move Deng and save the same amount (we could take back maybe $7-$8 million in longer term deals) 3. Renounce Tyrus Thomas while he's a restricted Free Agent in 2010. You combine 1 of those with letting Gordon walk and you have 2010 cap space. Basically, my guess is we need to clear a couple million more dollars. It's possible the Bulls could have 2010 cap space for a max deal currently...but that would mean that over the next 2 years, the Salary Cap has gone up from where it currently sits by just over $1 million, IIRC. I just don't think that's going to happen. There's one other key option...do a deal for Bosh this offseason. If you move Hinrich or Deng in a deal for him you can probably make the contracts work, we're sitting on an extra pick or two, we have the rights to other guys we can move (Omer Asik?), we're holding expiring contracts for next season if they want some of that and...this is useful...if you can grab Bosh this offseason, you can potentially extend both him and Gordon without going significantly over the luxury tax for more than 1 season. Given that we're not playing Tyrus down the stretch anyway and its even the bloody playoffs, why not try to package him with something and see if they'll bite.

So, I have to say, I think this is somewhat fascinating...for all I know, Kap could be right, there could have been some hidden buyer out there that the public would never have known about. But as far as I can tell, there is zero evidence for it other than Kap's assertions. It wasn't the government that forced Chrysler to go to the government last December hat in hand begging for money. I seriously doubt they'd have wanted to put up with the spectacle of Congressman Sherman if they had any choice. If there was a legit buyer, the government would have jumped at it. The government gave Chrysler plenty of time to come up with a buyer, and they couldn't do so. If there's this secret cabal of people out there who are willing to take less profit to avoid having government interference, that's kind of scary, but I guess I can't rule it out because it's kinda spooky too.

Go get em Jose.

QUOTE (BearSox @ May 2, 2009 -> 07:52 AM) There is absolutely no reason to suspect Pujols, IMO. I've watched him since he came up, and neither his body nor head changed drastically between any seasons. Sure he has filled out into his frame, but everyone usually does, especially when you workout using MLB weight programs every year. I just don't see Pujols body being an effect from steroids or PED's. You can only tell so much from body type though. I guarantee I've heard the exact same argument about ARod.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ May 2, 2009 -> 06:55 AM) I agree with everything except the Pujols stuff. The only legit HR hitter that I would be shocked about these days is a guy like Dunn. Worth noting is the difference between being surprised and disappointed.

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ May 1, 2009 -> 08:18 PM) Kind of random, but anyone else think it would be nice to have Thabo Sefalosha right now to slow/shutdown Pierce/Allen. The guy is a pretty awesome defender As shorthanded as we are without Deng, of course.

QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ May 1, 2009 -> 07:24 PM) I thought #1 was retired by the White Sox? Or am I confusing it with some of the other retired numbers? :-S Lance Johnson is the last guy I remember having that number for an extended period.

QUOTE (kristofer @ May 1, 2009 -> 07:18 PM) podsednik must have an unbelievable winning record when he is actually in the game with the white sox. He was here in 2007, no?

QUOTE (tommy @ May 1, 2009 -> 07:16 PM) I hate to bring up Ryan Sweeney, but he's been robbing people left and right last two games. *sigh* With a sweet .693 OPS.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 1, 2009 -> 07:10 PM) I hear Rondo plans on shooting Hinrich in the kneecap tomorrow. Gotta be at least a flagrant one, right? Depends on the caliber of the bullet.

Wow, that's the worst double play ever.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 1, 2009 -> 06:52 PM) Scotty! 1st and 3rd, 1 outs. Got to get this run in. Squeeze?? You can tell they're thinking about it by the fact that they threw to first before the first pitch, they wanted to see if he'd start to square on the motion.

Pods has more hits this season than Jerry Owens.

Every hit the Sox have in this game has been with 2 outs according to the Ragners announcers.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:48 PM) Its really interesting that you mention food and energy specifically in all of this. Energy because the Obama policy is to increase the price of all energy significantly, to the point where alternative energy is cheaper, and the people who are going to suffer the most are the ultra-poor. Food is another interesting mention, because if they start tearing down all of the free trade agreements like they made noise about during the campaign, it means that more family farmers, and even the larger factory farms go out of business, food prices increase, and less food gets grown. How many people would die because American farmers go broke and wouldn't plant? The replealing of NAFTA would pretty much cause a defacto border close for months are the trade wars and tariffs escalated in their usual historical manner. I don't think that has stopped the Anti-Mexico trade groups from trying to kill it. Mainly its crap because we make cost/benefit analysis in pretty much everything. Because the Obama administration wants to look "tough" just in case, and not panicking for everyone else, they are trying to play both sides of the fence. If this isn't a big deal, tell people to quit canceling schools and staying home from work. If this is an ordinary flu, don't ask for $1.5 billion that we don't have. If it isn't a big deal, take a trip down to Mexico to meet with their leadership to try to calm the situation instead of letting a crisis go to waste. If this is important, take some real steps and actually try to stop some infections, instead of hoping that no more cases come in. You think some people want border fences now, let some illegals bring a killer virus over and see how nasty it gets. You know, I'm just going to laugh at this rant and leave it at that.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 1, 2009 -> 06:11 PM) I'd f***ing s*** myself if I got near that thing. And why is it only an inch and a half thick? Is that to show off or something? I don't see the point. Because the thicker it is, the more of its own weight there is to support.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:50 PM) you cal tech guys always have the scoop. where was it centered? Burbank was shaking and rolling. The Santa Monica mountains, just west of Burbank.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:52 PM) And why would it end up in Chapter 7? Because no sane investment group would touch an automotive company right now because they know what the governmental interference in this industry could mean for their investments. Going off of the steel example, investors know there profitable potential in the US auto industry, but they want no part of the government in their pocketbooks. It isn't a coincidence when the last GDP numbers were broke down, the area that had by far the largest contraction was investment spending, even with a rebound in consumer spending. That is a huge red flag. Weren't you the one who insisted to me a few months ago that because the government started investments in sub-prime mortgages it was guaranteed that every investor in the world was going to jump in to an infinite degree? The reason why people aren't investing isn't that they're scared of something the government might do, it's that they're afraid of taking massive losses. Which right now is a pretty darn good bet. If there's money to be made, people are going to find a way to make it, regardless of whether or not the government is involved.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:17 PM) lso, I'd love to here how we are going to upgrade the SG position from Ben Gordon. The wrong side of 30 John Salmons who is going to want more money and ruin our cap in 2010 if we choose to keep him beyond that if he plays like he has pre-injury? Or maybe we'll trade for the 34 year old Raja Bell. Or are we pipe dreaming about Kobe again? Resigning Ben Gordon also kills your 2010 cap space.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:49 PM) I seriously doubt it. There could have been deals made - without the government help. Credit "crunch" or not. Between the mess that Chrysler is in general and the economic conditions right now, I simply disagree, and I'll leave it at that.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:43 PM) WOW - f***ING EARTHQUAKE JUST HIT US IN LA! woo baby, that was a good shaker. Initial magnitude = 4.4. I of course felt absolutely nothing.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:13 PM) You are confusing two very distinct issues. Liquidation (Chap 7) vs. Reorganization (Chap 11). There was always very little chance of Chapter 7... they were holding out (aka buying secured notes) for Chapter 11. Again, under a liquidation, no one gets anything, period, except the proceeds, which as you note is nearly worthless. You are co-mingling the two, as was Rex it would appear based on his post... My key point...without the Federal government stepping in, it would wind up in chapter 7. The only reason why it is not in chapter 7 is the actions of the government. No one is buying a car from a bankrupt company if they think there's a 10% chance their warranty is going to suddenly vanish because the car company went up in smoke. But if the government guarantees to keep the company running and guarantees the warranties and uses its funds as the bridge loan that the company can't get otherwise right now because of the credit market, then the company has a chance to survive chapter 11. In other words, the only reason those bondholders are getting anything is that the government stepped in. Otherwise, it was going to chapter 7 and its doors would already have been shut.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 1, 2009 -> 05:00 PM) Yes. Good call... except I would re-phrase - the government doesn't have to give them an assist, per se, because under normal reorganization, the secured holders are at the top of the food chain. That assumes though that Chrysler has a lot of assets that could be sold off. If the company has to shutter itself completely, the only assets it has are auto production lines, but those are pretty worthless if you're not building cars. The top of the food chain would get basically a bunch of empty buildings, to my eyes...if it wasn't for the guarantee of government help that they believed they were getting when they bought whatever bonds have exchanged hands in the last 8 months or so.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 1, 2009 -> 12:58 PM) Bondholders are investors. Investors take on risk. They expect equities to be honored, but also accept the risk of default. You can't have it both ways. Obama has done nothing I am aware of to cause this - Chrysler caused this. So I ask again... you are the President, you have to do what is best for the country as a whole - citizens in the economy, investors in Chrysler debt, and employees of Chrysler and their related industry... what would you do differently? Another point worth noting is that a lot of the current bondholders are people who bought those bonds expecting that they could get a solid return on their investment because they were buying in when Chrysler was looking like it was going to go totally bankrupt and they were anticipating that the government would give them an assist.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 1, 2009 -> 03:25 PM) So lives are now worth a cost benefit analysis? Interesting change of liberal philosophy. You're causing serious harm to a lot of people's lives if you close the border. Which is why it needs to be a truly dire situation. You can't just close it for days and get the effect, you need to close off the country until the epidemic burns out. That's a period of months. And we're not just talking about the Mexican border...you're talking air travel, and you've got to be talking ship travel as well. Imagine no trade coming in to or out of the U.S. for a period of 3 months. How many people die because of the famine that sparks off when we don't have energy to ship around foodstuffs? How many people's lives are totally ruined?