NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:52 AM) I have a sudden urge to play cards with you. Next time you're in town, I'll be happy to take your money.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:49 AM) Who voted KC and Why? I doubt that's a real vote. Just someone who wants to feel special. If I'm wrong though, that voter is welcome to come forward and explain why they will win the division.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:44 AM) :lolhitting Isn't tomorrow April first? You typed this post a day too early. November is coming. The GOP has already cemented the Party of No crowd by trying to block health care, but they also realize they ultimately failed. They can allow some members to sign onto an energy bill, if it includes offshore drilling and nuke power, and make it look like they can compromise, as well as tout to the Drill Baby Drill crowd. Its the winningest scenario available to them politically, so I'd be they take it.

Just added a poll to the thread.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:41 AM) I wouldn't mind it...if I thought we were actually going to trade it for something useful, as opposed to trading it for nothing. Won't happen. Obama is doing here what he tried to do on health care - offering olive branches to the GOP. If they burn the branch in his hand like they did on health care, then he won't give anything. This has been his approach thus far, and I don't think he'll change it. Also, unlike the health care mess, I think you'll see some minor GOP support for alt energy, so this stuff will pass a lot easier.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:39 AM) Obama all of a sudden a big fan of off shore drilling. Asshole. Its not that he's a big fan. Its that he is willing to do that, and nuke power, in order to get more money for the real, sustainably energy projects he is primarily interested in. Its the only way to get anywhere with this, unfortunately.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 08:01 AM) Dylan was at one point the only five star rated poster for the longest time. Someone bumped him down to a four star recently it appears. Anyway, you are currently the only five star rated poster. How does that make you feel? I just realized we even HAD star ratings. I'm a 3. Someone must not like Ross Gload.

This could be a PHT topic, or an ALC topic, but I put it here. Where do you think the teams in the ALC will finish this year? You can provide win totals and/or games back if you'd like, but its not required. Here is my wild ass guess... 1. CHW 2. MIN -3 3. CLE -5 4. DET -9 5. KC -16 Sox win the division because the big question marks - Rios/TCQ/Pierre/Jones - mostly do well, and the pitching is as expected. MIN doesn't do nearly as well offensively as people think they will in the new stadium, adjusts and makes a run late, but falls short. CLE surprises, but are erratic, with their young talent. Detroit is mediocre, and KC just can't get anything going. Yours?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 07:47 AM) You do know he's actually only 36, correct? I'm sure Kalapse would know that. Mike Sweeney has had so many nagging injuries over the years though, he might as well be 48, which is the joke I'd think. He started declining around 2007, but he did still put up a .777 OPS last year. Garko's career average OPS is only 15 points higher than that, where as Sweeney's is in the mid 800's.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 07:25 PM) He has Josh Fields disease. OR, we're putting too much stock in Phil Rogers' baseball "analysis".

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 04:29 PM) Good news everyone! There has been a long-running diplomatic dispute between India and Bangledesh about ownership of a small island just off of their coast. Thanks to rising sea levels...the island no longer exists! Something seems off here. Why would sea levels change more in the Bay of Bengal, than in the rest of the ocean or oceans? They should all level out over time. Isn't it much more likely the islands are sinking, than the sea is ONLY rising in the Bay of Bengal at that rate?

QUOTE (G&T @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 04:24 PM) Ok so what's the deal with Flowers? I've read recently a blurb that the Sox will likely sign AJ because Flowers appears to be lost. Cowley was just on the Score and said the same thing. So what's really going on? Boers is actually talking about it right now. lost? I haven't heard or seen that anywhere. He just isn't ready yet, as far as I know.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 03:33 PM) 1%? Maybe officially (which I still doubt), but you're not counting the massive number of undiagnosed alcoholics there are walking amongst us. Massive number? You think more than 1 in 100 of random people are alcoholics? I honestly don't know the exact number on that piece, but I'd be surprised if it was higher than 1%.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 03:17 PM) I'm mostly on your side of the debate, but I know for a fact there is no way that is even close to true and we'll just leave it at that. I'll see if I can find the numbers, I've seen that one before. And the violence thing is quite real, I've seen it. Yes, mixing drugs or alcohol and drugs is of course even worse.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) Cocaine can also kill you pretty much instantaneously and without warning, while alcohol doesnt have that direct capability. I don't think cocaine is any more addictive than alcohol, but it is leaps and bounds more dangerous. Not sure how you think that's possible. 75% of this country drinks at least occasionally - what % are alcoholics? 1% maybe? Cocaine, after 2-3 uses, is something like 30% addictive. They are on different levels for addiction.

Early April is a good time to update your AAP threads. We'll know soon where players will be assigned for the season, and many of them made some appearances in ST worth noting.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 03:07 PM) I see no difference in cocaine or alcohol in terms of impact to society or tendency to become an addiction. One was selected arbitrarily to be legal while the other is demonized. And no, I am not a user. Completely disagree. Alcohol is not nearly as addictive as cocaine, not the same universe. The great majority of people can have an occasional drink and not be addicted - if the great majority of people did cocaine a few times, we'd have 10's of millions of addicts. And while alcohol does represent danger to society, mostly due to DUI problems, a person with a few drinks in them is not nearly as likely to be violent as someone on cocaine.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 02:57 PM) How is your life impacted if you next door neighbor enjoys cocaine? It absolutely is. That's where cocaine is different than mary jane. A guy smokes a joint, he's pretty harmless to public safety, and isn't likely to get addicted either. A guy does cocaine, he'll tend to do a lot of stupid and dangerous things, and be much more likely to get addicted and do it a lot more often. There are increased risks to society there, dramatically increased, not to mention increased costs for health care and lots of other things.

QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 03:00 PM) Starting pitching is good, not thrilled about the question marks surrounding the lineup and bullpen. I think the bullpen looks like one of the best in baseball. Bullpens are always highly variable, for all teams, in all seasons. But a bullpen anchored by 3 guys who can close effectively, along with Pena and Linkebrink in the middle with Williams at LOOGY and Santos (the biggest ?) as the last man, is as good as most teams have. Its predictable, every year on this board, people worry about the bullpen. But trying to take a look at how we entered other seasons, this one looks as solid as any. Heck, it looks a lot better than what the 2005 pen would have looked like on Opening Day, with the track record of the guys we had going in at that point.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 02:53 PM) Good. Arguably one of the biggest keys to our team. If he can hit, he'll play every day in center I'd think, even on Sundays. More generally, the outfield is everything for this club, IMO. All teams have question marks. If you look at the Sox rotation, bullpen, C and IF positions, and the bench... there are few, fewer than a lot of teams. But the standard deviation, if you will, of possible likely performance values, for the OF, is huge - TCQ, Pierre, Rios and Jones are all very big question marks. If they are all disappointments, this team won't win 80 games. If they all live up to talent, this team wins north of 90. The outfield is this team's barometer, as far as I can see.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) Giving Lucy a look incase Castro's injury becomes worse I suppose. Or just giving Castro some extra rest, and allowing AJ to travel easy on the way back to Chicago. Interesting though, if Castro does go down at all early in the season... will they immediately bring up Flowers to be a backup? Or go with Lucy, to give Flowers full time play in AAA?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 01:37 PM) Mark to market comes about because of SOX. Companies have to report asset valuations accurately in real time. Not in real time - on a daily basis. Real time marks on all assets are not possible. And as others have said, the Unrealized P&L aspect, risk and asset valuation, are not what cause the savings here.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 01:21 PM) So are you guys telling me that they actually passed that thing about your monthly payment cannot be more than 10% of your gross monthly income? Yes they did - put it into the Health Care bill. Because, you know, its about Health Care.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 01:06 PM) I'm fine with Kotsay too, but it appears this board has already set up to scapegoat him ala Dwayne Wise already. Kotsay shouldn't be starting, but he is not nearly D-Wise bad.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 01:09 PM) I'll bet dollars to donuts the subsidy existed before Sarbanes-Oxley. The loans still needed to be subsidized so that the banks would loan at below market rates (and so that student wouldn't be charged interest while they're in school). Why you're obsessed with the accounting angle is a mystery to me. I see what he is saying about the asset accounting, but its unrealized P&L, so it doesn't matter here (that's where I agree with you). The key parts as to cash flow, and as to taxpayer dollars, is the lack of subsidy (as SS pointed out), and it sounds like the interest amounts go to the Fed Gov't now as income to the D of Ed. Feds still take on default risk in either case, so that is no difference. Implementation costs will rise now however, which will negate SOME of those savings.