NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 17, 2007 -> 01:18 PM) 1. Baseball's first 300 game winner was injecting monkey testosterone. This goes back a long way. 2. Specifically, in response to the "character clause" Northside brought up -- I respectfully submit that the clause is a joke. Of the initial HOF class, Ty Cobb received the most votes -- more than even Walter Johnson, one of baseball's nicest, "classiest" figures. The voters then don't care about "character" and neither do the current ones and neither do I. Are you a Hall of Famer? Check. As an aside, I don't care about character in baseball HOF matters, provided the guy didn't throw a World Series, molest children or kill anyone. Jerk? "Cheater"? Whatever. This isn't a pure game and I'm not going to punish people for what the league has allowed and does allow. I believe in the Hall as a preservation of history, not an attempt to delete inconvenient parts. The HOF is not a bin of stuff that happened. Its a place of honor for the game's greatest. Not voting players is nothing like "deleting" them. Its simply pointing out that they did not represent the best interests of the game. Also, by your standard that some players have gotten in that are not great people... that argument would hold no water in any other circumstance, so why should it here? People break the law all the time, and some of them get away with it. Does that make the law bogus? Of course not. If all you want is statistical performance, then don't bother to have a Hall at all - just have a big old server there that you can plug your Playstation into and drool for a while. Stats are great, but the game is unquestionably more than that.

In case you wanted a brief overview of where the top tier candidates in each party stand on a handful of key energy policy questions... here is a little chart for you. Nothing in-depth, but could be useful for some. Three interesting notes I took from it... 1. The parties are not as clearly delineated on these as you might think - there is some cross-party agreement there. 2. For reasons I cannot comprehend, they left Romney off, even though he is far more likely to win at this point than McCain, and probably Giuliani as well 3. Note that Giuliani doesn't seem to have actually taken a stand on... anything.

QUOTE(SoxFanInDallas @ Dec 17, 2007 -> 08:41 AM) My vote would be to vote these players based on their stats, not whether they took steroids or greenies unless it is proven they took them from the time these were banned and testing was begun. Except that unlike other sports, baseball specifically asks that HOF voters take into account the effect on the game in general by those players. There is a "character clause" as part of the evaluating criteria. To me, that is one of the things that sets baseball's HOF apart from others in a positive way.

Its going to be a long offseason if you think you can take Kenny at his every word.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 17, 2007 -> 02:14 AM) I surprised the national media is going after Huckabee. If he wins the GOP nomination, the Dems will win for sure. If they'd just back off until after the convention, they could assure a Democratic victory in the general election. Because, as I've said before, the MSM isn't biased so much as sleezy and lazy - and motivated by the almighty dollar like every other business. This sort of thing sells, and its what some people are looking for, whether they admit it or not.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) I saw this in yesterday's WSJ and forgot to mention it. Funny how this hasn't generally hit the mainstream media. Isn't BBC pretty much the definition of mainstream media? In any case, the pre-war output was terrible. Saddam had let a lot of the infrastructure fall apart.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 02:30 PM) You don't give up any more young talent for a guy who you're hoping will return to the player he was 3 years ago especially when said player is not nearly good enough to turn this team around. I agree. I don't want him either, unless he comes cheap (because he is losing his job anyway). And even then, the 2006-2007 Crisp isn't much better than Owens/Anderson/Sweeney, so you are taking a real chance.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 02:13 PM) I would really like to know why a lot of people are against getting Crisp. Because that .320-something OBP, .260's AVG and .383 SLG in his last 2 seasons is pretty unspectacular. But, he may recover his CLE form. Talking to some Red Sox fans, he actually started pretty well there two, but didn't recover well in 2006 after an injury to his hand. If that's the case, and he's healthy now, maybe he'll come back. The CLE version - near .300 hitter with some power and speed - would be a nice addition. Which will show up?

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 05:48 AM) My car broke down so im in the market for a new car, so far ive looked on craigslist but trying to see what else is out there etc. I found this site and was wondering if anyone has used it before and tell me if its legit or not, http://tox.craves.it/ Up to you, but, I wouldn't buy a car from a site based in Italy.

The MLB as an organization, and even more importantly the players, have been flouting the rules and the law for quite a while now. And the MLBPA has done everything in their power to keep the roiders roiding. I have little sympathy for them when a report like this comes out that may smear them a bit. Especially when most of them refused the opportunity to be part of the process.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 03:39 AM) oh we love the relief prospects. Like the Fabio Castro's, Jay Marshall's, Fernando Hernandez's; we just don't like that Ryan Sweeney is the best offensive prospect, and that I'm not sure I can truthfully name another offensive prospect who is actually considered good (Shelby, maybe? Cuz I'm not about to include Getz in on this) I like to think Bourgeois could be a major league player, but he's a bit old to call a prospect. Shelby perhaps. And I personally think that Sergio Miranda may turn out to be something. Plus there are some guys way down in Rookie ball that its too early to tell. Not an impressive list of position player prospects.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 09:44 AM) Im kind of sick of the media now talking about if everyone owes Barry Bonds some kind of apology. It doesnt matter that anyone else was doing it, the fact that he cheated and lied about it is why he got the criticism he did. Where are you seeing that? The only player I have been seeing that about is Sosa.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 06:45 AM) It's kind of funny, if all of this is true (names in the Mitchell), shouldn't Bud Selig actually be erecting a statue for Canseco? How much of this is happening BECAUSE of Canseco being an attention-whore and having to out people in that book. He is a BIG reason that this is all happening. Sort of ironic. Huge roider, and just a complete and utter asshole - worse than Bonds, it appeared - and yes, he is a major reason this is all happening.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 07:37 PM) the GOP wouldn't dare filibuster that much. If they did public outcry would run them out of the Senate in even larger numbers next election cycle. It would be prefect opportunity for the Dems to bash them. I am having a hard time seeing why, IN THIS CASE, you are blaming the Dems. That energy bill was a very good thing, now its been watered down a bit by the GOP, and the GOP STILL won't let it pass. Oh, and the White House is threatening veto. This one is directly on the shoulders of Big Oi... I mean, the Republicans.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 07:48 PM) You thought I meant average from "league average hitter"? That wouldn't make any sense at all in the context of how I wrote it -- none at all. If I wanted to write league average batting average, I would've wrote league average batting average. So yes, that was extremely silly of you. Dude, you're hilarious... makes no sense at all - that average meant average... I truly must be from another planet.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 07:41 PM) Who plays 1b for us? How confident are we that Lincecum will stay healthy? Josh Fields, and keep Crede around at 3B for 2008. or Trade MacD to KC for Ross Gload. I'd actually be OK with either, though I know most folks would hate the 2nd one. Plus firstbasemen are a bit easier to come by than some other positions.

Exactly the same as the Uribe contract. I wonder if BAL wants Uribe.

OK this is funny. Jose Canseco tried to enter the press conference, and was turned away by MLB officials. Canseco claims he just happened to be staying in the same hotel as the press conference.

Wasn't sure if this was SLaM or Buster, but it will probably become Buster material anyway, so... Here is the link. I don't know much about the case, but 1 of the 7 was acquitted, the other 6 will be re-tried. No word yet as to what the reasoning was behind that verdict.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 04:55 PM) Did they not do this by directly rewarding some of these players with mega-contracts and other individual perks (think Sosa, Clemens) when they knew full-well that these players' outrageous success was directly caused by performance-enhancing drugs? You're saying that unless a GM or manager or owner said "take steroids or be cut," they bear a very small part of the blame? You don't believe that they were de facto telling certain players that by awarding them these contracts or DFA'ing them when they knew full-well exactly why those players' performances were what they were? Yup - that's about it. Well, except that they didn't KNOW, in some cases probably. But other than that, yeah. NO matter how competitive the environment or how much money is at stake, unless the managerial staff was breaking the law or telling others to do so, I put most of the blame on the people who DID break the rules or laws. Its really quite simple.

to Big Frank!

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 04:44 PM) Have you had a chance to read the report? Did you read what was said about LoDuca by the Dodgers in 2003? They were concerned that he would not hit as many hard line-drives because he was not on steroids anymore. That maybe he should be dealt because he had some trade value. That the Marlins might be interested. Obviously, he was traded to the Marlins at the deadline in 04'. You don't think that management is more to blame because they fostered an environment where "performance was key"? How about an environment where you might be traded because you were no longer taking steroids and they thought your performance would decline soon? I have no doubt that some GM's were aware of what was going on. Doesn't change anything - the criminal actors have most of the blame themselves. Then as a secondary issue, one should look at the system and the other moving parts, and make changes as necessary. But unless GM's or others somehow directed or told or asked players to break the law (or the rules), then they bear only a very small part of the blame. Its all about personal responsibility, plain and simple.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 04:38 PM) Oh, I think they should. I think really it's a workplace fairness issue. There was tremendous incentive to use drugs that are non to have bad health consequences, just to perform well enough to have a job. I think that's the worst part of the whole "scandal". Bogus. Let's look at a similarly big money, highly competitive field - trading. Now, at times, "rogue" traders have been so motivated by the huge money and ultra-competitive lifestyle, that they crossed the line and ended up breaking the law to get ahead. Sometimes they get caught. Now, have you ever heard anyone say they felt that "the worst part" was that the IB's pushed them to make money? I'm sorry but having a competitive environment, and rewarding performance, are not excuses for breaking the law - and they are certainly not reasons to blame "management", unless "management was SPECIFICALLY DIRECTING them to do so.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 04:34 PM) But honestly, ask yourself these questions: 1) Why were some players cheating? 2) What would motivate a player to do so? 3) If I could do something in the context of my profession (in terms of HGH), in which I would not immediately be caught (or caught at all), and could very likely result in a drastic pay raise, could result in my family and friends being financially taken care of for life, would I do so? 4) If others in my profession were "cheating," thereby making it more difficult (or even in some cases impossible) for me to be compensated according to my true value, would I be tempted to cheat as well? Would I cheat? This is far more complex than merely blaming the players for cheating. So much more was at stake- and that which was at stake was because of the fault of the managers, the GM's, the Owners, etc. I find it overly simplistic to simply cast the majority of the blame on the players. The entire baseball industry deserves to be blamed equally, IMO. Certainly players such as Frank Thomas and others deserve praise. But I don't believe that the players who used steroids or HGH should be the only ones cast in the spotlight created by the Mitchell Report. So because they were "motivated" to cheat, by peers cheating or because they could make more money, that someone makes them less to blame? Or because management fostered an environment where performance was key, that someone made them partly to blame? I'm sorry but that makes no sense. It would carry no water in any other line of business either.

No Ross Gload. I'm happy.