NorthSideSox72

I've got 5 or 6 suits, but one is different than the others - its a custom tailored suit. I wouldn't go getting a bunch of them, they are very expensive, but I've had the thing now for like 8 years and it still rocks. There is really nothing like a suit and shirt that were literally made to fit you personally. They tend to handle body changes a lot better too (gaining or losing weight, muscle, etc.), because its got just the right give everywhere. The only reason I even did it and could afford it is because a co-worker's father was a custom tailor in Hong Kong. He came over and took suit details for a whole bunch of us from the office, and they are a lot cheaper (or were anyway) in Hong Kong (even though it was Italian material). Dude did all the measuring, I selected materials from samples, he went back, had the suit made, and shipped it to the states.

On the subject of bullpen pitchers and offseason workouts, this article about Wassermann's chance mentions he's been doing upper body strength work and getting a good change-up working to help against lefties.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) I'd be curious to hear the candidates asked this question. Many of you spoke of ending subsidies to oil companies as prices and their profits hit all time records, not to mention talks of windfall taxes. Now with basic food prices at the same point, would you support the same for farmers? If not, why are energy prices more important than food prices? I do think there is a difference between subsidies for farmers so they can stay afloat, versus subsidies for corporations that are making huge profits. But I would agree that as ag commodity prices rise and stay up, the farm subsidies should be revisited and probably reduced or in some cases eliminated. Or, put some of those subsidies towards programs helping farmers transition from corn to better energy-producing, non-food crops.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Feb 27, 2008 -> 10:03 AM) I hope their ideas are as good as ETHANOL. BTW. Why don't these moderators ask the candidates about the boondoggle called ethanol. Obama wants to end famine in the world? Hey Barack, how did you vote on ethanol? Ethanol is fine as a bridge technology on the way to other things. But its certainly not any sort of long term solution, and its got its limits. But the biggest reason ethanol is a "boondoggle" is the insistence on using corn. Right now of course, that's what's available. But other countries have made much better use of much more energetic biomass, and if you are going to have ethanol be part of the picture, you need to use those other crops. Using corn, its ineffective and causes all sorts of economic problems.

I think we'll see a lot of Anderson, MacDougal and Uribe the first few games - showing off the trade bait. Same for Crede once his hand is fully healed (which is supposedly in the next few days).

Oh and, I forgot to add another political dimension, and this is actually good news... Obama, Clinton and McCain all have significantly better and more consistent records in protecting the environment than BushCo. And they all have made statements about getting serious on alternative energy. To what extent they can actually make changes we'll have to wait and see, but, ultimately, they'll likely to a lot more than has been done the last 8 years. And that should help pay off economically in a big way - job creation in young industries and lowering demand for oil.

I must have missed something the past few weeks... why is a visa problem Richar's fault? Did he forget to submit some paperwork or something?

Oil prices reached an intraday high of $102. And it now takes more than $1.50 to buy 1 Euro. The NZD and AUD are quickly approaching dollar parity. The loonie already passed the dollar. Oh yeah, and, home sales are not levelling - they are still falling quite rapidly. Yikes. Whomever the new Prez and Congress are, they are going to be facing an enormous mess. And here is something to consider on that point... if you are a Republican in terms of the economy and business, you may actually prefer the Democratic candidate come November when it comes to those topics. Why, you ask? Because an Iraq War pullout means that Congress has hundreds of billions more dollars in its coffers. That could be used for lower taxes, for balancing the budget, for debt paydown, for infrastrucure spending and jobs that go with it, and other economic programs that could actually help the economy. Just sayin'. One of those weird backwards political things that comes up sometimes.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 11:30 PM) Damn guys I'm disappointed... no blow by blow account? What do you all think? I didn't get to see a minute of it. I couldn't watch real time, but I am watching a few clips of it now. Looks to me like Clinton really is all over the place, playing every card she has left up her sleeve. Played the victim, complained of some sort of media conspiracy, evoking former democrats, comparing Obama to Bush, claiming bad campaign tactics... really just all over the board. Obama didn't look great mind you, I think he was taken aback by Clinton's very aggresive angle in the discussion - she really just couldn't wait to interrupt not only him but the hosts as well. But I think he comes off a little better than Hillary, just because he seems in control, calm, collected. She looks desperate.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 10:52 PM) My prediction is that Mac is a "throw in" with one of Crede or Uribe in a deal. In that case, it's down to Masset and Broadway, in which case I see Masset taking it, just based on the options situation. Not saying thats the right call, it's just what I see happening. if Masset has a solid spring, and they carry 7 relievers, I would be good with that. I just hope you're right about MacDougal. He has some value in trade because of his talent level, and it would save a few million.

I was kind of upset to see the organization lose Hernandez, I thought he was worth protecting (more so than a few others on the 40). And Wing could have been re-signed to a minor league deal - and he looked like he was really recovering nicely from his injury (and has loads of talent). Trading Gio and Sweeney I understood, and we got a good deal. But just letting Hernandez and Wing go for no apparently good reason seemed pretty short-sighted to me.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 10:44 PM) Neither one did anything to help their case, but especially Chuck. He got hammered today. Kong's HR is still landing. As I said, Masset was ok today, but didn't do anything to turn any heads. Right now, it needs to be Jenks-Linebrink-Dotel-Thornton-Wasserman-Logan-MacDougal/Masset/Broadway Fixed. MacDougal is a head case who crumbles under pressure. If Masset can look really good though, he might have a shot, since he has no options left. My worry is that, because MacD is signed to a deal, if they can't trade him, they'll force him into that pen.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Feb 16, 2008 -> 05:39 AM) From the sounds of it, Masset has worked hard in the offseason. That can only add to the sox pitching options for SP or the bullpen. Don't get me wrong, I like Wasserman and he showed he can get righties out [though his lack of success vs lefties is a big concern going forward]. Yet the Sox need a long man in the bullpen more than they need a specialist like Ehren. I'd like Masset to make the team one way or another. I wouldn't be heartbroken if Danks went to AAA and FLoyd and Masset were in the rotation, and a guy like Broadway was in the pen. That would make the sox nicely set in AAA for SP insurance with Danks the 1st callup and Egbert #2. However it pans out, the sox will take the best guys north-even with the guys being out of options. Well, I'd call Masset and Wassermann two very different pitchers, role-wise. Wass is really a 1 inning or less guy, Masset is a starter or long reliever. Not really an interchangeable thing. Masset is useless as a ROOGY or any other sort of specialist - his numbers are pretty close to the same level of bad against both sides of the plate. The contest Masset is in is against Haeger or someone else looking to get a long reliever spot, if they carry 7 pitchers. And his only advantage as far as I can see is that he's out of options - which isn't much of an advantage.

Well, I give up. All I can get is a video equivalent of that Chevy Chase news conference scene from Fletch. I did catch Clinton complaining that she always has to answer first though, and then something about asking Obama if he needs another pillow. That must be the SNL reference. She's not helping herself trying to play the victim here. She had the press at her fingertips for MONTHS, then suddenly when it was clear that there were other horses in the race, the press started covering both sides. How dare they.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 09:09 PM) yea, hotel wireless probably wont be fast enough to stream live video. Its actually wired in this case, and its not even doing the hitching thing - just saying "loading video, please wait". Crap. How does this TV not have MSNBC?

Dammit. This hotel TV doesn't have MSNBC. And I'm on the MSNBC site watching the supposed "live" video, but its just sitting there saying "loading video".

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 07:39 PM) I think i agree pretty strongly with you that he will stay out of the endorsement game, but if he gets in, I don't think there's a chance he'd endorse anyone but BO right now, because of the potentially large downside. I think Chris Dodd's a pretty good example. A few weeks ago, the race was so much in flux that if he got in early, and the candidate he endorsed were to lose, he'd potentially have made a powerful enemy. But now he can still get in with Obama while his endorsement still looks useful to the candidate, and now he can give the President a call and say "Can I count on your support for the majority leader position?" when that race comes up in the future. That's why Obama's the hot endorsement lately...because now you can still get in before he has everything wrapped up and therefore still have him owe you a favor. And if you look carefully at what he said and the situation he said it in, it doesn't seem like he was hinting all that strongly. It may be nothing. One other note. I think Richardson should have had that beard when he was still in the race. It makes him look a bit more dignified, and less overweight. I think that his physical image was one of this downfalls, even though it should be irrelevant.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 05:53 PM) I think I'm probably one of Crede's biggest fans because of his defense and decent hitting. I still think defense and pitching are the keys to winning. however, given the fact the Boras is the agent and the price he will command, I'm ready to begin the Fields era. Realism is more important than getting attached to a player. I am a White Sox and baseball fan. As much as you want to get attached to a player, the improvement of the team is the most important aspect. IMHO I have to agree. Its not that Fields is or may be better - I think thats a big question mark. Its that Fields looks like he will be a very good hitter, and will be cheap for years to come. Crede is a great defender, but, the rest of his future is all question marks - is he signable, and at what salary? Is his back healthy? Which hitter is the true Crede - the very good one from 2nd half 2005 through 2006, or the mediocre one from 2004 to early 2005? And is his brief 2007 performance even worth considering? Too many questions. My one official jersey is a Crede, and I wear it proudly. But unless some bizarre set of circumstances comes up, I think we are at the beginning of the Fields era.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 07:09 PM) That all certainly makes sense. But that also conflicts with the loyalty issue. Ultimately, Richardson is a very, very ambitious guy. I thought, back when it was a tighter race, he'd make a play to for a high level office (SecState, SecEng, maybe even VP) to both of them, and go with the best offer. But if neither had much to offer, he'd stay out - which he did. Now... I'm just not sure. You might be right. But I think its more likely he just doesn't endorse at all - I'll revise my view to that. ETA: Keep in mind too, he's a lock for as many terms as Governor as he wants for all practical purposes. Its not like he's hurting for a job. I'm not sure he'd see that Senate seat as a HUGE step up from the Governor's chair. He's still pretty young.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 06:59 PM) The question is...how much of a gambler is Richardson? It's entirely possible that he could endorse Clinton and she could still lose badly at this point, and therefore he'd have made himself an enemy in the Dem Nominee by trying to go for his throat just as he was about to secure the thing. If Richardson, or hell, anyone, was going to gamble on endorsing Clinton, they would have done so some time ago before things got so bleak and when they wouldn't have to risk alienating the President. No one is going to endorse Hillary until after Ohio and Texas, and that's only if she can pull off the upsets again. That all certainly makes sense. But that also conflicts with the loyalty issue. Ultimately, Richardson is a very, very ambitious guy. I thought, back when it was a tighter race, he'd make a play to for a high level office (SecState, SecEng, maybe even VP) to both of them, and go with the best offer. But if neither had much to offer, he'd stay out - which he did. Now... I'm just not sure. You might be right. But I think its more likely he just doesn't endorse at all - I'll revise my view to that.

Game info.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 11:56 AM) A possible Richardson endorsement by Friday? I'd be surprised if he didn't endorse Clinton. He's just got too much history with them. I hope I'm wrong of course.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 02:12 PM) Hillary's still going to win, you dork. I personally do not count her out, not just yet. I'm not counting her out right now. But if Obama wins Texas and Ohio, I think its over. If each take one state, Clinton can limp along, but she may elect not to. The only way Clinton has more than a sliver of hope is if she can win both.

I was thinking about it. I used to live down there. Autozone is actually a very nice park, by minor league standards. Plus Memphis is a blast to visit for a weekend.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 26, 2008 -> 01:55 PM) If Texas and Ohio vote for Obama, the supers can vote however they want and it won't matter. Yup. Besides, as I've been saying for a few months, the supers want to WIN IN NOVEMBER. And since the polls pretty clearly show that Obama is much more well-equiped to beat McCain, you can bet that the uncommitted supers will more often than not want to back a winner. This idea that Clinton will control all the supers may have looked correct back in the fall, but not in the current landscape. By the way, I have to say, it was really strange leaving the country on Feb 8 and coming back Feb 24, and getting back to the news of this race. Quite the dramatic shift.