NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 02:46 PM) it's all gibberish to me. I have no capital gains. lol And that's why this goes under the radar - for a significant chunk of Obama's core constituency, it all just looks like less money for rich investors, and that's fine with them. But in reality, if those "rich" investors put less money into the capital markets, the whole economy suffers. You have to be very careful with that tax level.

4-1 D-Backs, through 2 innings.

Now, I'm a supporter of Obama. But this is just not a smart decision. He tells CNBC he is thinking of taking the current 15% gains tax, and upping it to around 25% (no exact number yet). Under Clinton, it was 28%. I am all for changing the tax code to treat gains as income for those who take most of their income from trading activities of their own capital - that just makes sense, closing the loophole. But to change the cap gains tax rate across the board that dramatically, basically doubling it, when the economy is staggering... that's just a bad, bad idea.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 02:36 PM) I think KW would rather keep those guys in Charlotte to begin with. Maybe Ohka or maybe scouring the waiver wire. That's one school of thought - the guys who could eventually be starters at the major league level (Egbert, Broadway, etc.) might be better off getting in starts at Charlotte than being in the pen in Chicago.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 02:32 PM) Losing Masset wouldn't be a huge loss. He's basically being handed a job he has yet to earn and he still can't do anything with it. I can see why they gave him the shot - he has some talent, he's out of options... but ultimately, if they decide the team needs a long reliever / sixth starter type guy, probably better to just bring up Haeger or Broadway anyway. Despite the overall lack of talent in the minor league system, the Charlotte team will have a few decent starting pitchers on it. One or two of them are likely to become something good.

QUOTE(The Beast @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 02:26 PM) I'm not sure, but who would want his sorry ass? There's talent there - someone will pick him up. Or, I think, the Sox can put him through waivers, and if no one bites, they can send him to Charlotte.

Looks like Swisher made an error - anyone see it? Masset getting beat up.

My bad - I'll change the thread title.

QUOTE(flavum @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 01:11 PM) Against CC, I hope Thome is dropped in the order. Or better yet, not in the lineup at all. I believe that Ozzie has said, against LHP, Thome bats 5th. And I'm sure he will have some off days against them as well, probably moving Dye to DH and putting an extra youngster in the OF. Which seems good to me.

New X-Files film coming out on July 25th, for those who didn't know (like me).

Interesting. Despite the fact that a lot of people on this board have been panick-posting at laughable levels of hyperbole, so far, the poll shows only 2 votes for a record below .500.

I'll throw this out there too about Masset/MacD/Wassermann. The biggest concern about Wass going into this spring was his horrible performance last year against lefties. Well, look at his numbers this spring, and specifically, note that he's not been used as a specialist at all. He's been putting up a full inning or two, and facing plenty of lefties. And yet, his numbers have been quite good - 3-ish ERA, a sub-1 WHIP, and striking out twice as many as he walks. It looks to me like, maybe, his new change-up and the changes he made about his mound location, have helped him out in his weak spot. These are spring numbers, but, I think he's showing signs he may be more than a ROOGY.

QUOTE(flavum @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 01:00 PM) Could be the Sox last game at TEP. Nick Swisher, CF Orlando Cabrera, SS Jim Thome, DH Paul Konerko, 1B Jermaine Dye, RF A.J. Pierzynski, C Carlos Quentin, LF Joe Crede, 3B Juan Uribe, 2B Nick Masset on the hill. Other than Uribe v Ozuna, and the exact oder they are in... I think that's the Opening Day lineup.

QUOTE(mreye @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 10:45 AM) I'll admit I was to NorthSider's comment, but I won't to yours. Your comment was the one that really pisses me off. No, I don't live in a trailer, but I also don't go around making rude, sterotypical comments about people that live in them either. Well, if I offended anyone, I apologize. It appears I made an assumption, and I am not sure why, other than maybe the thin walls - but its a bit embarrassing. So again, sorry that I accidentally started this little wildfire.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 12:04 PM) Agree completely on LOTR. The films were really good and all, but the books are among the best fiction the 20th century has to offer. I don't think anybody will ever be able to pull off what Tolkien did — creating not just entire worlds, geographies, histories, and mythologies, but actually going so far as to build entire functional languages based on his expertise as an ancient language academic scholar. I make a point of re-reading the books every few years and I'm always completely blown away by what he was able to accomplish. Some books you appreciate more than you enjoy - know what I mean? The LOTR books were that way for me. I could have great respect and awe for what Tolkien created, but, I could never get as fully into the books as some other people did. To me, the movies were one of those rare instances where the films brought the story to life in a way the books didn't. But I admit, I am probably in the minority on this one.

I was thinking 88 to 90, so I took the 86-89 option. If 2 of the 3 back end of the rotation actually have decent years, and if this team stays healthy... they have a shot at a playoff spot. But ultimately, I think they'll fall just short of the post-season. Now, if the rotation sucks, and/or the team has health problems, then they'll be lucky to play .500 baseball.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 12:09 PM) They probably did. I tuned into Fox and watched the Bush speech. I don't have a TV here - what is he speechifying about?

QUOTE(Mplssoxfan @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 11:25 AM) That line has been attributed to Harry Truman, among others. It's funny, but it's old. Gravel stole it? Well... I give up then, I've got nothing good to say about him.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 11:18 AM) Oliver Stone Casts Parents Of "W". Cromwell is an excellent choice. I think Banks was a very good choice for Laura Bush as well. Brolin I'm not sure of - he doesn't have the look. But he does seems to excel at playing characters that would make him a good match.

QUOTE(lostfan @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 09:51 AM) MacDougal is a filthy pitcher by any standards, and when it's going for him it's great. But it seems he starts feeling the need to overcompensate and starts trying to knock AJ into the backstop when he doesn't need to. I guess, once they get to the major league level, I am more results-oriented than method-oriented. MacDougal can have all the flithy stuff in the world, but its been since 2006 that he's been good at getting guys out. And throughout his career, he does works in pressure scenarios (runners on, runners inherited, scoring position, close and late) than otherwise. That's just not the guy I'd choose for the pen.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 09:40 AM) MacDougal hasn't given up a run in over 3 weeks. He definitely seems to have stabilized a bit. But as MacD has a history of doing worse the more pressure he's under, I'll be surprised (pleasantly) if he actually does well during the regular season. Hey, if he does well, great - the team will be getting its money's worth. I just think that Wassermann's chances at success are better than MacDougal's.

QUOTE(Disco72 @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 09:30 AM) If the Sox keep Wasserman (who I like, by the way), just wait until one of Count/Floyd/Danks goes 2-3 innings and/or the game goes into extras and Ozzie has to destroy one of his "one inning" guys (pretty much the rest of the pen) like he did Vizcaino in 2005. I'm sure people will find it pretty stupid that we don't have an innings eater to take those innings. The better solution to that may have been to keep Masset and Wassermann, and send MacDougal down to AAA or trade him (if that was possible).

D-Backs against the Sox at TEP. Masset to start, Wassermann also to throw - its the last roster spot showdown. Game will be on CSN, for those who want to watch the fight.

QUOTE(Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) Sarcasm aside, my point was that Pods has prooven something around here, while Owens hasn't. Both healthy, the defensive/speed gains from Owens do not outweigh Pods big game play. We all watched every second of the ALDS/ALCS/WS and we all know what Pods did in said situation. I would bet Owens couldn't reproduce it, or even come close, despite his "skill" being at a higher level on paper. Pods' performance in the first two-thirds or so of 2005 was just what that team needed, and he was of great value. He did indeed make some big time plays, and his HR in Game 2 of the WS will always be among my best memories ever as a Sox fan (I was there). That said, given the option of having either one right now, I'd take Owens hands-down, for the reasons I stated earlier. He's better for those reasons, and he's cheaper, with more speedy years ahead of him. One can seperate the two things. I love what Pods did, but right now, Owens > Pods.

QUOTE(Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 08:54 AM) So if you had a Delorean equipped with a flux-capicator, you'd take version 2008 of Owens, travel back in time to 2005, and replace Pods with him, since he's so much more awesomely better? It amazes me how lacking of an attention span modern America has. Pods prooved he can come up HUGE in HUGE games, Owens has prooven a boatload of zippo so far, and you say he's better? At what? Getting injured? Pods > Owens when both are healthy, because one has prooven how good he can/will be in the biggest games of their lives...and Owens has been on a team that lost 50000 games with all of his awesome speed/defense. Um... yeah, I really wasn't thinking Delorean. I mean, when we're talking Pods and Owens, we're more in Chevy Cavalier territory I think.