Balta1701

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 01:25 PM) Dude. Shut up. In 2003, the White Sox played Carl Everett in CF over Aaron Rowand. Therefore, using your logic, Carl Everett is the best centerfielder in baseball. Flaw in your argument...they were playing Everett while sitting Rowand, thus getting Everett's bat in the lineup. If Clark was starting at the same time as Podsednik, that means Podsednik was chosen to be in CF while both of their bats were in the lineup. Everett's bat and lack of defense were being compared to Rowand's defense and lack of bat. Podsednik and Clark had that positioning chosen based on defense alone.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:18 PM) Took this off another board. Take it for what its worth. There were a bunch of people commenting on the same thing that they had heard, and were running with it. It maybe false. But that means Roman Colon is in their rotation, or Zumaya will come out of their bullpen to join it. Either way this weakens their team. MLB.com confirms.

Maroth to undergo arthroscopic surgery Someone want to update the title of this thread?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) For my money, the leader at the gate has to be James Thome. Sure, but he's not a Yankee!

Dealing only with the Sun Times, because that's what Lexis is letting me have Mentions of the Cubs vs. White Sox in the headline or first sentences of an article: 2006 (as requested) Cubs: 570 White Sox: 513 2005 (note, White Sox sweep Astros to win first world series since 1917) Cubs: 1351 White Sox: 1486 2004 Cubs: 1800 White Sox: 1138 2003 (note: Cubs make NLCS, choke) Cubs: 2024 White Sox: 1391 2002 Cubs: 1281 Sox: 893 2001 Cubs: 1015 Sox: 736 2000 (note...White Sox won AL Central this year) Cubs: 944 Sox: 948 1999 Cubs: 939 Sox: 560

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:54 PM) How dare we score 3 runs against the hottest pitcher in baseball. We faced Jose Contreras?

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:44 PM) I stopped counting at three the number of employees of this non partisan group who previously worked for the AFSCME. (no Agenda there). How about the guy who was Economic Policy Director for Kerry Edwards Campaign?? OOPS!!!! Non-partisan, I forgot... Gimme a break!!!! Because the guy you cited was clearly right down the middle and totally unbiased, like all Heritage people are. Here's the raw CBO data. Tell me which part they changed.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:41 PM) But anyone who claims we cant trade x prospect because x is too valuable is mistaken. Jeremy Reed, Joe Borchard and the rest say Hi. As long as the X is not Brandon McCarthy, I agree.

So, according to press reports this morning, the Department of Homeland Security has decided to enact significant cuts in the amount of anti-terror funds going to New York and Washington, the cities actually hit by the last set of terror attacks. See, now normally, I might not be as annoyed by this one, because it may very well be a sign that the folks in washington and NY were spending the money carelessly in earlier years. But Here's the one that got me. So we're cutting funds to NYC because it has no national landmarks or icons, while Omaha and Louisville do. Heckuva Job, DHS.

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:31 PM) That would make sense except the D-Rays are stacked with OFs between both the MLB and Milb level, Baldelli, Crawford and Joey Gathright all are 25 or under. Then you have Elijah Dukes, & Delmon Young. i would think they would want Fields/Rogo & Broadway or something along those lines. Given who's in front of Rogowski at this point, including him in a deal would be absolutely ideal.

QUOTE(Sox1422 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:23 PM) I was thinking more along the lines of Broadway and Fields. Crawford is signed under a deal that would keep him a Sox until 2011 and never pay him more than 10 million (final year option) I think he make betweeen 2-4 mill now. If we're talking about getting Crawford, clearly including Anderson or Sweeney in that deal becomes a logical move, for exactly that reason. We'd have control of Crawford for 5 more years or so, which would leave us with Sweeney, Anderson, Crawford, Podsednik, Fields, Owens and Dye as potential outfielders for the team for the next few years, with Crawford and Podsednik not going anywhere for a while. We'd have more outfielders than we could deal with, so one of those two guys would be a logical element to include. QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:26 PM) i have no problem giving up fields and broadway for someone like Crawford. For every 50 prospects drafted 4%(2players) make it to the show and of those two players how many actually become impact players? What is the number for first round picks?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:10 PM) The payins rise, along with the amount of money they would receive from SSI and Medicare. What it comes down to is that the system projects are made with only so many low income receiptiants in mind. As with every other federal program, the rich pay in more than they receive to fund the poorest within the program. If you add a disproportionate amount of people to the bottom end of the equation, without adding people on the high end, you end up with shortfall. The true income potential of most immigrants is capped because of their educational status's being rather low, which means they can only make so much money in a lifetime. The true income gains for immigrants are made in the next generations of those families as they become mixed into the US society, culture, etc, and begin to acheive the key components of wage potential such as speaking English, high school/college graduates, skills training etc. See, that's the one interesting thing about Social Security though...while 1 higher income earner would pay more into the system than 1 low income earner, beyond $90k a year salary for the high income earner, the percentage of their income paid into SSI declines as their income goes up, because of the SSI wage cap: only the first $90,000 of a person's income is taxable for Social Security. In other words, while a CEO may make 6000x the income of a person making $15k a year, he only pays 6 times as much into the SSI system. This is fundamentally different from the income tax system, in that it is far more regressive. This dramatically reduces the amount of the program that is funded by "The rich" compared to other parts of the tax system, and significantly lowers the level at which people pay more into the system than they get back. Unless that cap is raised (Which has not happened since the Clinton administration), the only way the SSI system grows is if more people pay into it. Furthermore, the exact amount paid out would be a strong function of life expectancy, which I think we all can probably agree is going to wind up being significantly less for a person born in the U.S.

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:13 PM) You Really think they would want McCarthy, personally i would think they would want someone along the lines of Broadway, the clock hasn't started on him. But i digress i too would love to see Crawford on the sox. If they want McCarthy...the conversation ends. That simple. They can ask for anyone else but him.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 12:07 PM) Didnt the Rays want a boatload for Huff last year? I know there under different ownership, but I have always been under the impression that its hard to get a deal done with the Rays. Crawford would be great, but once again, not the most pressing need. Yes they did ask for a buttload for Huff...but they also let Baez go without getting a buttload in return (which is what they were asking for under the old ownership as well).

MLB strength of Schedule from ESPN

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 11:56 AM) Even the Heritage article said that medicare and SSI would be net losers in this transition, meaning even if they are isolated out from federal income tax revenues, they would be making money off of both of those programs as well, right? In the short term I believe the answer is yes...because of the way the program is structured. If an immigrant were to work for 10 years and pay into SSI and Medicare, then retire, they would be eligible for those programs. But, only paying in for 10 years does not pay for the entire cost of an average retiree on those 2 benefits. However...eventually this turns around eventually, as the incomes of people who remain in this country longer tend to rise with time as they gain experience and language skills, and as the people who retire have on average been working for longer and have paid into SSI and Medicare for longer.

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 11:52 AM) yeah im glad i had the foresight to take him and Verlander for MLB 8 player fantasy challenge. Didn't the twins give up AJ to get Liriano? and if so who else did they get i can't recall. On a side note the ALC is going to have lots of talented young pitching for years to come, god i love the central. AJ for Lirano, Nathan, and a 3rd guy who's hanging around AAA. One hell of a good deal for the Twins, and it's turned into a very good deal for the White Sox too.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 11:50 AM) I would doubt it. Those are two separate taxes emarked for specific things. They aren't included as federal tax income. I think you're right, although the CBO gobbledygook is some of the worst I've read in a long time at making that clear. Their marginal tax rate may be negative, but they're still paying out into Social Security and Medicare, along with state taxes, so they'd still likely be paying out somewhere around 5-10% of their income depending on the state rates.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 11:38 AM) I couldn't get past this paragraph. According to the CBO, the bottom quintile of tax payers paid an estimated -5.7% tax rate in 2004, with the second quintile paying a -0.1%. How is adding negative tax payers going to increase revenues? Do those numbers include Social Security and Medicare?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 11:17 AM) We DESERVE this? What the **** planet are you from? We can't get any better because the corporations, etc. have bought the entire government. You damn hippy.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 10:25 AM) snore. maybe the cubs had a few more stories because they made a trade yesterday, they have injured players who are on the road to recovery, and people like to b**** and moan? give me one story about a white sox winner, and 5 about a cubs loser, and im happy... get over it. So if this guy posts one of these every day, and some of us are interested to see what the actual numbers are, will there be 5-10 posts every day saying "Yawn, this doesn't matter, etc." If for no reason other than curiosity, I'd say that it's interesting to keep track of these numbers. If people don't care, then they don't have to read the threads. Sound like a fair deal? (Note, not a specific response to Steve, just sort of used his post as an example. No offense).

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 10:04 AM) Exactly. That is why this bill is a piece of doo doo. It is pandering at its highest form. Has anyone seen the study done by Robert Rector? What do you think? Response from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, including estimates of how much the immigration reform act would cost based on CBO numbers and historical evidence.

The Mets acquired righty Dave Williams (2-3, ERA over 7, placed on waivers last week) from the Reds for a minor leaguer. The Reds sent lefty Ben Kozlowski to the Dodgers to complete an earlier trade for Cody Ross. Kelvin Escobar agreed to a 3 year, $28.5 million extension with the Halos. Sauerbeck entered a not guilty plea. Willie Mo Pena needs surgery and will be out like 2 months. Right after they got Coco back.

Kevin Federline (Yes, that one): (Quickly changing my voter registration to Republican....)

QUOTE(vandy125 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 08:58 AM) LOL, for anyone that has seen it, this reminded me of Major League 2 (I know great movie). When Tanaka tells Cerrano "You have no... you have no... marbles! You have no marbles!" who replies "Marbles? Huevos?" That was sort of the point.