NorthSideSox72

Just got back a couple weeks ago from a few days' backpacking in the Apache Kid Wilderness in New Mexico. I do at least one real backcountry trek every year - even run a small co-op with some friends for people who enjoy the outdoors. We backpack, canoe, mountain bike, whatever. I've spent a lot of time in the wilderness, and I am a firm believer that getting fully disconnected from the grid every so often is a very good thing for the mind and soul.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 25, 2011 -> 09:25 AM) So we are working through these things slowly but surely. We have to get through this before home prices start to rebound, and most consumers are able to really spend again. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/08/25/rep...d-of-all-sales/ I also saw that IL new home sales and permits are still going down a lot, and are among the lowest in the nation. That is good, IMO - makes IL in a better rebound position. We don't need a glut of new inventory.

After being returned to starting mid-season, Shirek started off OK, but has since slid back to what he was doing last year. It seems clear the guy just doesn't have starter stamina. Look at his splits this year... AS STARTER: 4.97 ERA, .314 AvgA, 13 BB vs 20 K in 41.2 IP AS RELIEVER: 3.09 ERA, .223 AvgA, 13 BB vs 29 K in 35.0 IP Just make the guy a reliever and get it over with.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 12:49 PM) It will be interesting to see if this is finally the excuse to break the metals finally. Probably will be more of a gradual thing, with the occasional, dramatic hiccup. That's my educated guess anyway, but who knows.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 12:42 PM) Gold is down about $100 an ounce today, and about $150 over the last two days. Silver is down almost 3 full dollars per ounce today. Markets are solidifying a bit, at least for now. Fear factor is down a little, VIX with it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 10:51 AM) Any idea whatever happened to them? The one who could speak normally with other people, went to Carnegie Mellon and finished, I believe, a dual degree in Engineering and some sort of science... in three years. Then was going onto a PhD program. Don't know what happened after that. The girl who was a basket case went to some Ivy League school and was doing music and something like literature, don't know after that. The third guy, no idea. But now I want to go Google them.

The funny thing is, even though I seem to be the only one in here who is OK with the acquisition (if it even happens), the biggest reason I would hesitate isn't even being discussed. The problem is Adam Dunn. I have almost no doubt that Thome is going to do better than Dunn the rest of this season. But we have Dunn signed for 3 more years, and will need the guy to perform. If we take the bat out of his hands the rest of the year, that will not help the Sox' future, and may indeed hurt it. If I were to hesitate on the move, that is the biggest reason.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 10:53 AM) I'm actually pretty happy the Sox claimed Manny. The team is on the brink, chances of winning the division are dwindling fast, but it is not quite over yet. 2011. The same as 2010. Except of course that Manny Thome. So no, nothing like the same. QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 10:53 AM) I'm of the opinion that the cost of adding Thome (which isn't a concern) the rest of this year would outweigh the ticket sale increase the Sox would see by adding Thome. I doubt there's a lot of fans out there who are going to want to go to the game just to see Thome play right now. Hell, I'd be much more willing to go to a game or two down the stretch if I knew I'd see Viciedo play instead of Dunn or Thome. Oh I'm sure the ticket sales difference is not likely to make up his full salary. A combination of that, and the Sox being more likely to stay in marginal contention, might. But it isn't purely a financial decision either or course. Just like a lot of people want the Sox to draft more high risk, high ceiling guys... I want the organization to keep fighting when there is a real chance (and when the team ahead of us isn't that good). Now, if in a couple weeks the team is 8 or 9 games out, then yeah, it is time to change gears.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 24, 2011 -> 10:51 AM) Such a cop out. If this organization had any respect for the man, they would've allowed him to slip past us and see where he goes. Just because someone else might have been the bad guy, doesn't justify us being it. I guess I don't see it as being the bad guy. KW has a job to do. He and Ozzie failed to do it properly when they let him go back then... so that means he should screw up again now, intentionally? Screw that. As long as the team has a shot, and as long as he helps bring crowds, the Sox should do it.

I'm actually pretty happy the Sox claimed Thome. The team is on the brink, chances of winning the division are dwindling fast, but it is not quite over yet. Besides, Thome being there will put more butts in the seats, which helps the team's payroll situation (partially offsetting his cost). And Thome has said he enjoyed his time with the Sox. So the only reason to hesitate, really, is the whole thing with getting Jim a shot at a ring. I can understand that, I'd love to see him get a ring, but it isn't exactly a known thing he'd go somewhere else and have a better shot anyway. And if Jim doesn't want to come here, he can just say no.

The Junior High class one year ahead of mine was once a Life Magazine cover story, because in a class of about 60 kids, there were three who had IQ's OVER 200. They were pretty sure nothing like that had ever happened before. A 200 IQ is almost 7 standard deviations from the norm. Interesting to me was, I knew all three... one was sort of normal, but eccentric would be an understatement. Another was a virtual hermit, couldn't cope socially at all. And the final one redefined the term socially awkward, not to mention she was an emotional basket case. I really think being that intelligent in the intellectual sense is probably more harmful than helpful, those kids just had a real hard time related to other human beings.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:09 PM) poll of Iowa voters. huntsman is the only republican candidate unfavorable outside the margin or error. And they really dislike him. and I bet he has one of the highest, if not the highest, in the do-not-know category. That would be his undoing. When someone is that unknown, the favorable/unfavorable numbers are pretty useless. Once candidates get to where the unsure/do not know category are down in like the 20's or lower, that is when the values are useful. But he probably never gets to that point anyway.

QUOTE (Cerbaho-WG @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:11 PM) Has to be referring to Short and Marrero. There's no one else. Not even Marrero. I was thinking, for example, that Brandon Short has a better shot at being a major leaguer than Thompson, though clearly his ceiling is lower. Jose Martinez is toolsy and raw like Thompson, but still more polished, and I'd see a higher chance of him contributing as well. Guys like Thompson that are athletic and toolsy, but stike out a metric f***-ton, are high-risk high-reward. Out of 10 Trayce Thompsons, maybe 3 make the majors for more than a cup of coffee, but 2 or 3 become starters or even above average starters. Out of 10 Brandon Shorts, maybe 5 make it to the majors and contribute, but one or none are above average players. That's all I was trying to say. For the record, I still had Thompson higher on my prospect list than Short, for overall value. But they were only a few slots away from each other.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 08:39 PM) Yeah, at this point, it would be a minor miracle for him to become a major prospect again. Thompson is far and away our top outfield prospect besides Viciedo. If by "far and away" you are referring purely to ceiling, then yes. If you mean chances of actually becoming a productive major leaguer, I'd say there are a couple others at a similar level or possibly higher. So I'd hesitiate to use "far and away" in the overall sense.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 03:58 PM) Plus Joe Biden has been one of Obama's best assets in this term. Republicans will negotiate with Biden because he is "Not Obama." Wait, what? The human verbal trip-up has been one of his best assets? If it is true that the GOP will negotiate with him because he is Not Obama, than that would work for anyone he picked as a VP. Not that he would ever pick Huntsman or any other Republican, but still, I don't see how Biden has done anything to help Obama, at least in the public eye. What he might do behind closed doors I don't know.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 03:38 PM) It's a bad idea to have him start at DH, unless you guys want to carry three catchers all season. If he starts at DH and AJ gets injured in a game....well you know Yeah, the worst case is maybe, maybe, one game in a year, the Sox might lose the DH for part of a game. A few at-bats tops, and pinch hitters can still be used. That is such a minor concern, it shouldn't really get in the way.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 03:40 PM) It's not over because we're 5.5 out, it's over because we are not good. We are in a deep hole because we were bad in the early season, really bad. This team has the 4th best record in the league since May 7th, and they've won what, like 11 of the last 16? And I'll take our pitching over DET's any day. People seem to assume that Detroit will keep winning. They really aren't some juggernaut. Obviously, if DET contiues to play .700 baseball like the have the past week or two, the Sox have no chance. But I just don't see that happening. I'm not saying the Sox WILL win the division, I think their chances are like 10-20%. But they sure as heck aren't zero.

5.5 games in 5 weeks... when the Sox have 6 games against them, a whole bunch against mediocre or worse teams... after Wednesday they are done with all the big teams in the other divisions (NYY, BOS, LAA, TEX)... and DET has shown all year they aren't consistent or that good, except for Verlander and Valverde. This is far from over.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 02:39 PM) That chart has to be fake. Just look at Texas. Seems like a very odd mix there, hard to pin a reason on which states are strong and not. IL and IN are next to each other, but have castly different tactics they have been using lately. MT is a whole different story, and then there is the SE coast. On the strong side, TX and NM, and three plains states? Weird.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 12:48 PM) The people I read who actively work on clean energy policy are aghast at that NYT article that Mr Genius cited. In particular they're frustrated at the part I've bolded, how in their efforts to write an article saying that green jobs haven't shown up, they limited themselves to 1 city in the san fran area, but then missed massive job growth throughout the rest of the eare. Talk about a bait and switch. The NYT cites the Brookings study, but then pulls out one tiny piece of it to make the exact opposite argument of the study. As Climate Progress wrote, Brookings actually found nationwide: On top of that, median salaries for cleantech-related jobs are $46,343, or about $7,727 more than the median wages across the broader economy. But you’d never know that from the NYT hit job.Link2 Which would explain the 2% number nationally, which is actually a huge number, that they tried to make sound small.

I was on a conference call with people in NJ and NYC, and they suddenly said the building is shaking, and all jumped off. At first I thought maybe some sort of attack. Sort of odd, a few hours earlier, there was a quake in southern Colorado that was the strongest that state has had in like 40 years. Coincidence?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:54 AM) That is usually not a good sign, but a sign of a company trying to prop ups its stock price for its shareholders. Usually it fails and the stock price floats back to where it started from. No, you are misunderstanding. This is not a COMPANY buy-back, which is what you are describing. This is an individual exec buying shares FOR THEMSELVES. And at that scale, no one exec is buying enough stock to move the market in that stock purely on volume (except a few notable ones that have ridiculous money even by CEO standards). They are only doing it if they think it will make them money, which means they have confidence in a rebound, sooner or later.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:45 AM) Knowing the way things have gone this season....they'd finally bench Dunn, ruining him forever (according to Rongey) and then Thome would go all Manny Ramirez 2010 on the White Sox. That is my only hesitation. The Sox have this guy signed for 3 more years... he is 5 for his last 15, and had his best (only?) hot streak of the season on the west coast where we are about to go. If they bench Dunn for Thome, that might just kill the guy's chances to recover, what of them there were.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:35 AM) When he says all marketplaces, that is a pretty broad spectrum. Anyways, a bald short sale ban will torpedo this market, because it will remove all confidence from it. I highly doubt it happens. I just saw an article yesterday, a survey of a bunch of high line money managers... 95% of them anticipate the market to go up as the year closes, average among them was like 15% or maybe higher. Corporate execs have been buying their own company stocks massively. It isn't that these people know everything, it is that they are the ones who move the market, and they see jumps. So I just don't see the short sale ban happening, which as you indicate, would take the wind out of the sails of the markets.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:31 AM) That would be a pretty impressive piece of collusion because of the clusterf*** of regulatory agencies for the financial industry. They did it in 2008 on the financials. I don't think it serves any good purpose right now, I hope they don't do it.