NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:38 PM) Because they are set in the OF, and are probably saving some room on the payroll for Santana. You think they will be keeping Santana around? Or extending him? Its possible, but it seems unlikely to me.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:32 PM) Twins still have Santana. With him, they're easily better than the Sox are right now. Hopefully they'll trade him and Nathan prior to the year. Sorry, that's true - I am actually assuming Santana is gone. I guess its possible it stays. I think without Santana, unless the return is amazing in CURRENT major league talent, I think the Twins are in a battle for last place. Heck even with Santana, I think that team has gone downhill this offseason thus far. People say the AL Central is tough - and it is. But I think DET and CLE are in a whole different atmosphere than the other three teams. And if the last few moves go right, the Sox will be on top of the "other three" group - for whatever that is worth.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:27 PM) The roster, as it's currently constructed, would likely get 5th place in the AL Central. Even Ozzie knows we need help. Right now: 3rd or 4th. If they can improve CF: solid for 3rd. If they can do that and improve at least one SP slot: 3rd and in shooting distance of 2nd if either CLE or DET falters. Outside shot at a playoff spot.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:25 PM) Haha, KW should be fired on the spot then. He should make the Dodgers take Contreras for Pierre. I'm one of KW's biggest defenders. But if we end up with Pierre, I will be pissed. That would be an absolutely useless move. The team would make no improvement, but take on a bunch of extra salary, and preclude some better possibilities (there are still a few out there).

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:23 PM) Yeah, after thinking about that comment from Rosenthal, the Giants might be closer to winning a division than the Sox. Disagree, but its not terribly far off. Even though the Sox are a much better team, as it stands. CLE and DET just look really tough.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:17 PM) There will be trades. 2 SS and 2 thirdbaseman. I just hope KW is bluffing about the pitching being fine as is. What did Levine say the Sox offered Rowand 4/55? That's a lot of cash for a guy who really has had only 2 better than average seasons. If you can sign Rowand, then yeah you still need to trade Crede and probably Uribe. IMO, you trade for one of only two things - an SP to bolster the starting staff (as you allude to), or for some good prospects if they can be had.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:11 PM) 4 years I could maybe live with, but that 5th year option would have to be a team option, and not a player option. I imagine Rowand's probably after $55-$60M over 4 years right now. If they can get Rowand for, say, $54 over 4 years plus some sort of team option, I'd be pretty happy. When looking at it in context with the Hunter contract, I'd say that would be a steal. But that would still leave the team improved over 2007, but probably not improved enough. More is needed.

I was really hoping for Fuku. I thought, if he could handle CF defensively, he'd be a very good match for the team - better than many being discussed. And 4/50 seems reasonable to me, given the market. Damn. The list keeps getting shorter. I guess we have to hope for Rowand, or a trade for Hamilton or some un-discussed CF now. Please no Pierre or Crisp, unless Crisp can be had in a steal. QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 11:03 PM) Rosenthal said Sox are still keying on Rowand, and might offer 4 years with an option. For the right money, if the Sox get Rowand for 4 years, that's really not a bad result. Its a pretty huge improvement over last year.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) Just an FYI, the Sox have not been linked to nor have shown any interest in... a. Erik Bedard b. Dan Haren c. altering their starting pitching in any way heading into 2008. Buehrle Vazquez Contreras Danks Floyd/Gonzalez is already our set rotation. I wouldn't bet on anyone's roster moves based on whether or not there happen to be rumors around regarding a certain move.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 02:08 PM) Where did I mischaracterize derivatives? You seem to be attaching the concept of counter-party risk with whether or not the instruments are derivatives. The two facts are unrelated. What creates counter-party risk is the lack of a clearing organization between the parties. Therefore, listed and cleared derivatives have no more counter-party risk than, say, stocks and bonds. Where you get counter-party risk is with OTC instruments, such as CDS's.

No more snark please. We like both short and long posts here. Next post that isn't on baseball, and the thread is closed.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 12:30 PM) Trading for Josh Hamilton looks better every day. I tend to agree, depending on the deal they want for him. QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 12:38 PM) Right now, I have a feeling though that Juan Pierre might be our CF next season. I would rather have ANY of the names mentioned so far for CF for the Sox (Rowand, Fuku, Crisp, Hamilton, Ramirez, even Owens) than that guy.

Fred Thompson is conceding New Hampshire. He has decided to go full time in Iowa from now until the 1/3 caucus, then if he actually survives that, he'll skip ahead to SC, NV and other states. Looks like the death nail for him. I just can't see him having a chance now, with three strong candidates ahead of him in IA and NH (or, in some states, 4). Its really amazing because a lot of people, myself included, thought he'd be an immediate top 3 candidate on entering the race. His campaign just sucked.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 10:45 AM) The third domino is counter-party risk. As derivative mkts replaced cash mkts in the trading of debt, counter-party risk was created. Each CDS is a swap between two counterparties, and a broker-dealer is on one side of every transaction. In cash markets, the performance of the debtor is the creditor's only concern. In the derivative markets, the lender must also be concerned with the performance of the counterparty. Counterparty risk in the CDS market lies with sellers of protection, or the insurers of risk. Banks are the primary sellers of CDS, totaling 40% of all written CDS and representing notional exposure of $18.2 trillion. Banks claim to run hedged books, effectively serving as a market-maker in the CDS market. As evidenced in the sub-prime events, most are unable to fully hedge their risk. If you thought banks were asleep at the wheel during subprime, consider this: The "counterparty Considerations section in the Credit Derivatives Primer of market share leader JP MOragn is a single paragraph on the last page of the volume, which proclaims "the likelihood of suffering (counterparty default) is remote. Hedge funds are in over their heads as well, as they are sellers of 32% of all CDS, insuring exposure of $14.5 trillion. Recent estimates indicate the entire hedge fund mkt has approx. 2.5 trillion in net assets under management. Thus, hedge funds are bearing risk in excess of their ability to pay the piper if anything goes wrong. You are mischaracterizing derivatives markets. What you are talking about are OTC derivatives markets, where you assume a lot of counterparty risk. The traded markets with clearing houses are there to neutralize much of that risk. CDS' are traded exclusively (at this point) on OTC, so yes, they put people at full risk against counterparties.

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 10:09 AM) The notional value of CDS(Credit Default Swaps) today surpasses the amount of underlying cash bonds by an order of magnitude. Today, CDS contracts now total $45.5 trillion of outstanding credit risk, growing an amazing 9-fold in the last three years alone. $45 trillion is almost 5 times the U.S. national debt and more than 3 times U.S. GDP. This CDS mkt is woefully undercapitalized. Sellers of credit protection post margin for marked-to-market moves, but CDS contracts are generally uncollateralized. Investment banks hold one side of each CDS transaction claim to be hedged, but their financial statements show neither loss reserves nor bad debt reserves for potential counter-party failure. As I said, I agree that the CDS market is a scary area right now, and the fact that some banks don't hold reserves to cover their callable risk on the receive side of those contracts is part of the reason. But, I wouldn't get all panicky about a market collapse or anything either. And I would also not focus so much on notional value, which is not the same as real exposure from a risk perspective. Only a small percentage of the underlying bonds are at any real default risk anyway, and only a very small percentage of those have had credit protection purchased via CDS. The real capital risk is a very small fraction of that $45T number. That isn't to say you may not see some financial institutions get clocked pretty hard by this though, if they don't cover themselves. They aren't clearing houses, and their capital is essentially multi-collateralized for exposure purposes. There is definitely significant risk there.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 10:02 AM) Looks like the Cubs will do anything to get him. I hope he's a bust. http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/padre...1s11padres.html $50M? Over what period? I really like the idea of Fuku on the Sox, but if they are talking $50M over three years, I am starting to think I'd rather have Rowand.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 09:47 AM) I also think the amount of suffering by the animal counted against Vick here. Dog fighting is vicious, although the end result is the same, I do think there is something qualitatively different between putting an animal down and letting it fight to the death. That's the key. He didn't just kill dogs, though to do so for no good reason would be bad enough. This was the systematic abuse and torture of the animals.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Nov 29, 2007 -> 01:09 PM) pfft, yea if you are fighting the prototype. I guess if you up a against the first prototypes of a stealth bomber the plan would be "stand around and watch it crash" If I recall from the first combat use of the stealth bombers (Gulf War I), all that was needed was some rain. The radar "soaking" panels soaked up rain like a sponge, and the things made a radar image bigger than an aircraft carrier, thus defeating their purpose.

QUOTE(knightni @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 10:17 PM) We need at least one more RP, a CF with speed and to trade Crede. We really don't need to trade the farm for a loaner who's overrated. I'd replace that RP with an SP, and add on that we need to move Uribe as well. So the remaining to do list looks like: --New CF (preferably a leadoff type guy, but more importantly, someone who is good) --Trade Crede for the best prospect package he can fetch --Trade Uribe for the best prospect package he can fetch --If one is available, take a flyer on a Colon or Garcia type SP for a 1 or 2 year deal

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 09:10 AM) You think the sub-prime mortgage/cdo/siv/mkts are melting down, they are a drop in the bucket compared to counter-party risk in the derivative mkts. As of Q3 2007, the (BIS), Bank for Int'l. Settlements, is reporting that derivatives traded on exchangessurged 27% to 681 TRILLION DOLLARS. They also said investors may have shifted some trading to exchanges from the over-the-counter mkt to reduce the risk of counter-parties defaulting on deals. I wouldn't worry about listed derivatives counter-party risk so much. Most of those traded instruments are done top-month in contract, or within a couple periods, so your risk window is less than a year for 90%+ of your exposure. Plus the clearing houses like CME and Eurex are very, very well capitalized, not to mention when they see the slightest blip, they adjust their margin requirements immediately. I'd in fact say that since its a gigantic number in LISTED instruments, that makes me feel a little better. The place to worry is the OTC market. Swaps, for example, are getting really big really fast. And while there are some tools available to connect front offices, the settlement is still all 1-to-1. The LCH tried to start a common clearing house for swaps a while back, called Swapclear, but I think that died off. CME is now attempting the same, I believe. That will happen eventually. But in the meantime, swaps are much longer term contracts, so in that case its a double whammy of risk - extended risk periods and OTC agreements. Plus the usual potentially-infinite risk of derivation, and I can see the swaps markets going haywire if, for example, a lot of default calls occur, like you'd have in the CDS markets. And guess what? With all the mortgage mess, those default calls are in fact bound to increase. So yeah, in the OTC markets, swaps particularly, I can see a lot of risk being taken on there.

Huckabee up 11 in SC now... Huckabee: 30% Romney: 19% Thompson: 18% Giuliani: 13% McCain: 10% He now seems to hold solid leads in IA and SC, recently took a lead in a MI poll (amazing given Romney's MI connections), and he's closing on Romney in NH.

First South Carolina poll since the big Oprah rally down there (it was actually done right around the time of the rally) and... Obama: 28% Clinton: 22% Edwards: 14% Biden: 10% Richardson: 2% Obama now seems to be leading IA and SC, and NH is in toss-up territory. Hey, with the Sox offseason lacking news, I have to have some sort of competitive sport to follow!

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 08:14 PM) We should all be thankful that Kenny Williams doesn't sell crack or any other hard drugs. Considering people are actually buying the pitching won't be a problem when 40% of the rotation is Gavin Floyd he of the career 8-10 record 6.30 ERA, and John Danks 6-13 record he of the 5.50 career ERA. Another part of the rotation is Jose Contreras, a guy I do like, but a guy coming off a year that was awful. The White Sox #5 pitcher in 2006 in now the #2 guy. I'm thinking if they buy KW saying the pitching won't be a problem, they would buy just about anything he sells. Show me one poster in here who is saying "pitching won't be a problem", or anything like that. You won't find it, nor will you find anyone who is "buying" Kenny's statements at face value. But hey, don't let that stop your hyperbole. We're all concerned about it. Its just a question of what concerns are higher than others, and what might be best to do about it. Oh, and, again... its still not April.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 05:53 PM) here we go again http://www.ardemgaz.com/prev/jonesboro/afhuckabee08.asp Huckabee Because of his positivism, and the fact that he isn't Giuliani, I was holding out a little hope he'd be someone I might be OK with. I guess not.

I could swear I said this like 2 months ago.