Balta1701

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) Let's just hope Owens keeps 1) getting thrown out on the basepaths or 2) striking out or grounding out to 2B or popping up weakly to CF... The other way for Owens to lose his job is if Kroeger and Wise both have solid games today. Kroeger clearly is getting a look at 1b to see if he can handle anything other than the OF, that's usually a good sign IMO.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 12:16 PM) Its not the overspending that is the issue, at least not for the Trib. Their reporters and staffers make very little, they actually spend too little on technology. They inability to adjust and adapt quickly enough to modern media is the problem. Actually, I'd disagree with that too. There needs to be a little bit of contraction within the industry as a whole to account for the fact that people have other news sources, but a lot of these papers are still profitable and are even becoming more so as they cut back on things (i.e. my LA Times weighs half as much as it did last year). What's killing these guys is that, like a lot of businesses, they over-expanded and bought up everything they could on credit at the peak of the market and they just assumed that nothing would ever go wrong. Suddenly now though credit is a lot harder to get, and these guys like Zell who bought up the Tribune entirely by taking out loans are having those loans called in, and they can't get new financing to keep going.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 12:52 PM) THANK GOD SOMEONE signed Denys Reyes and he's gone from the Twins...and they didn't get Juan Cruz. A double-whammy. And Mauer is having some aches and pains already in ST. Has anyone noticed how Crede is doing up there so far in ST? Joe is 2/18 in 6 games that count so far, for a .111 BA. FWIW though, Joe hit .135 in Spring last year.

Wise, CF Pierzynski, C Scary thing we keep putting in LF: LF Dye, RF Konerko, DH Kroeger, 1b Fields, 3b Getz, 2b Beckham, SS Richard on the bump. Horacio Ramirez starts for the Royals.

So yeah, this was absolute brilliance. We don't need any insurance any more. What could go wrong?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 12:45 PM) The way I heard the story was she WANTED to use it... but basically got told to shut up. Exactly...the way you heard the story...before someone bothered to look in to it.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) I get the feeling that Marquez is the 6th starter right now in their eyes. If the 2 vets are healthy enough to go 6+ innings with no troubles, that's exactly where he should be. If he performs in the minors this year, he'll get his chance to step in at some point, and there's likely 2 rotation spots opening up at the end of this season if he can continue to earn it.

Was going to note this here yesterday just as the site went down...the guest tonight on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart? One James Cramer.

Usual story route: Someone spins something as unkind to Democrats (Pelosi in particular). Story goes up on Drudge. Story goes to Fox News. Story migrates from Fox News to other cable outlets. Someone other than Fox News takes 10 minutes to fact-check the claims in the first story. They fall apart easily upon investigation. No one on Fox News, Drudge, or the other nets ever bothers correcting their error, because it would make them look bad instead of making the Dems look bad. Thus, everyone believes the idiotic false story Fox and Drudge run. Case. In. Point.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 12:00 PM) I still call it the Horizon. I am apparently behind the times on Chicago buildings. Took me like 5 years after the switch happened on that one to realize they were the same building.

Is the Rosemont Horizon still called the Allstate Arena?

BP Session again today. Cowley twit:

Just stick this here for now... Thome scratched yesterday with tightness in his back. Guillen says it's just precautionary. BP sessions on tap again today for Colon and Contreras. Couple folks optioned to minor league camp yesterday while down...

Don't see it posted yet, this is kinda cool. IU grabbed their team's manager and put him in to a couple games.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 12, 2009 -> 09:29 AM) So will the entire city. f*** Willis. Unfortunately, just like when a ballpark changes its name, the media will all be required to refer to it by its official name, and eventually it'll get stuck.

Owens went 1/4 with a go-ahead single and RBI yesterday. Although it was off fo Julio, so I'm not sure if it counts.

Let's see, while we were gone, RNC Chairman Michael Steele had an interview with GQ released...this one is just fun... Part 2: Lack of adequate hatred of the gay menace? Uh-oh. He better not slip up anything else. To put this in terms Sox fans might understand...this translates roughly to "I don't think that taste is there."

I'm so going to punch this guy Willis if I ever meet him. Jerk.

QUOTE (CWSOX45 @ Mar 11, 2009 -> 09:28 AM) This is true. Which is a reason why he is relying mostly on his change-up. I saw him two days ago. He threw 50/50 fastball and change-ups. He only threw two sliders. His problem was locating his two seamer. He had no problem locating his change-up, and actually got a couple of strike-outs. If the White Sox can sign him to a minor league contract I'd be all for it. I still think he can make an impact with a Major League club. No one ever has a problem signing guys to minor league contracts to give more people chances to try out/work through things. The problem is...most guys don't want to accept minor league deals. Not when there are 30 teams out there in the big leagues, most of whom could use bullpen help.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 11, 2009 -> 09:24 AM) He's been hurt for a few days, supposed to return today. I know. He's only got a handful, but when he's gotten them so far he's hit.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 11, 2009 -> 09:12 AM) I want to see Lillibridge in CF leading off, for about a week of ST to see what happens. I'll take Lilli leading off for a week but I want to see if Kroeger can play defense out in CF as well.

I really want to see Nix get some more AB's.

I know I said I wasn't coming back to the M2M discussion, but Bah, I learned something tonight. To start off that discussion, 2k5 insisted relaxing M2M would allow the markets to go through the roof. I responded that there was no way they were pricing these assets at the current market price (like 20% of their initial value) because if they were doing so they'd already be insolvent. 2k5 Responded that if that was the case they'd be breaking the law. As far as my brain could comprehend we were both right, either they had to be breaking the law or they were insolvent because those assets are so close to worthless. I can offer a response to that in the SEC's "Clarification" of the mark to market rules that they issued last September. Basically they set up a 3 tiered system of how you price complicated assets. The first tier, used in normal times, is what you could get for the asset on the market right then. If there is no solid market for an asset though, then the bank is allowed to account the asset under level 2...the price for similar assets. But if similar assets are being sold off at fire-sale prices because they can't be moved, then the bank is allowed to price the assets based on the company's models of how it would be valued in normal times. In other words, to my eyes the SEC already allowed the banks to value these assets on their books at much higher amounts than what they'd be worth on the market right now, and they may very well be allowing them to value them higher than I think would be a reasonable value for them even long-term...because the valuation in the model is going to depend incredibly strongly on how you model the real estate market, where the bottom is, and how rapidly it recovers. So, it's possible that I'm still right and 2k5 is also right...the banks aren't breaking the law, but the "Clarification" has already allowed for pricing of these assets in a way that assumes some model of their long-term performance. That brings up a number of issues. First, someone else can elaborate for me on this...let's say the SEC dropped the M2M provision in 2 days (Rumor says they won't)...if the rules are as loose as my reading of the "Clarification" says they are, that the bank simply has to use a reasonable model to produce a value for those assets for their bookkeeping, then how exactly would relaxing it any further do anything? It might improve the appearance of the bank balance sheet because the bank might inflate the value of those assets on their books even more, but if the loans go bad even at the rate they're currently modeling them, then the money on that balance sheet would still turn into write-downs in the near future for someone. Second, given the price of the stocks of those banks, I'd say its entirely possible that the market is in the stock price evaluating the models that the banks are using. If the market believed the banks were using solid models, then the banks would be on sound footing and there would be no worries. Which of course means that...if the market already doesn't believe the numbers the banks are putting out...then how will allowing the banks to pretend that the assets are worth even more improve its confidence? Anyway, the SEC rule on these is a fascinating read. Really you can sense the trouble they realize the banks will be in if they don't give them a wide berth to decide what their assets are worth. I like learning things.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 10, 2009 -> 06:32 PM) Is there a person in here who likes Cramer and takes his advice? If there is...I'm sorry about your investments.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2009 -> 06:24 PM) That is pretty much my point. Without insider information or hindsight, there wasn't a single person alive who wasn't recommending Bear. Digging up pieces from before their collapse is disingenious. So is trying to say that you weren't telling people to buy their stock.