NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 11:28 AM) If he bulks up, you can say goodbye to that bat speed. Grow and develop, sure, but no need to bulk him up. Adding muscle isn't going to reduce bat speed, unless he puts on like body-builder type mass, which isn't what anyone is talking about here.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 09:46 AM) Where did everyone find their realtor? Or their mortgage broker (if you used one)? We didn't have one when we started looking at condos in the city back in 2004. We saw a sign on a building with a unit we wanted to see, and she happened to be the listing agent. We called, she showed up in like 15 minutes, and it went from there. We are now listing our condo for sale through her, our family has used her before, and she's fantastic.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 09:29 AM) When I got fired from my job, I didn't go out and spend my savings. I cut costs and tried to make it last as long as possible. I didn't sit around trying to justify why every expense was necessary. From a prudent standpoint we have no idea how long this lasts, especially with the pretty commonly held belief that this recession could have another leg, why blow all your money right away? I'd assume you did both, right? Cut costs, but if you still don't have the income to cover even after that, you needed your savings. Its all part of the picture.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 09:22 AM) I think in this case, the Fed is reporting "Income" in the same way that G.S. and many others are. It gets recorded as paper income, but it's not exactly sustainable and it only counts as income because the Fed itself is propping up the prices of the things it owns. Its not sustainable, you are right there. But it wasn't meant to be. And you are wrong on the propped prices, because that's not income. Its unrealized gain, which is an increase in asset value. Not the same.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 09:10 AM) Last I heard, it was almost all gone already. Of the $400M currently held, $270 or so is going into this year's budget as a stop gap, half of which is to be repaid. $130M stays, another amount similar to be repaid, and I am not sure about the remaining $600M or so - maybe they haven't received that part yet? That section of money I honestly am unclear on. The rest is out there in the public domain, if you want to find it. Regardless, that was the purpose of that money anyway. The fact that its being spread out over time is good.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:54 AM) My definition of smart but ignorant would suggest that if she set out to familiarize herself with a campaign's policy issues, at least on a basic level, she wouldn't struggle to do so nearly as much. QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 09:03 AM) Bouncing around from mediocre college to mediocre college lends me to believe she isn't very smart. In fact, I have yet to see an examples of her smarts. Seems to be getting by on looks most of her life. First let me say, the defintion of "smart" is obviously subjective, as well as highly disparate. There are lots of different kinds of "smarts". But as to her not learning things, I didn't get the impression from anything I've read that she spent much time trying. Furthermore, you can't spend a lifetime remaining blissfully ignorant of actual fact, then suddenly in an evening prep session become versed in foreign policy. She's ignorant by choice, which is what I was getting at. Now, is she a genius? Probably not, definitely not in the overall sense. Is she an idiot? No, I'd bet her IQ is higher than the average American. Is she on the same plain as Obama or McCain in this regard? No, not even close, probably. She's clearly not fit for high office. And I think her bouncing around from school to school is yet another example of chosen ignorance. She achieves what she wants to achieve, not what someone tells her she should achieve. And actual, factual or historical knowledge are not what she chooses to understand well.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:54 AM) According to Baseball America the Sox have re-signed Josh Kroeger. Hopefully, he'll get some play come spring before heading to AAA. I'm sure he'll get an invite, and compete with De Aza for a bench spot that may or may not exist, before going to AAA. He's basically the backup-backup OF.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:36 AM) Just to go to the recent tell-all book that the media is on now for an example, how do you then respond to Palin's difficulties with say, prepping for the Couric interview or the Debate with OBiden? Where things were going so poorly that they had to bring in McCain's campaign manager to re-work the debate prep and seriously reduce the level of what they were going over? I'm pretty sure my statement covers that exact scenario.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 08:07 AM) You really think that? At least if it comes to specifically the question of facts, book-learning, etc.? (Ignoring the kind of smarts that allows you to connect with people, etc.) She is smart but ignorant.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:13 AM) Spy Game with Robert Redford and Brad Pitt is on AMC tonight. Easily one of my top 10 favorite movies. Such a high cool factor. Interesting how they made Brad Pitt look and act so much like a young Redford in that movie.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 07:59 AM) I'll just call it like it is -- Obama is intelligent, well spoken, and not a blithering idiot. Palin speaks like an annoying jackass, isn't intelligent and is a blithering idiot. And I don't even care for Obama much. The worst part is, it seems to me, that Palin isn't an idiot - but she prefers to play one on TV. Its psychotic.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 07:50 AM) Let's just keep in mind that they've already spent the billion dollars they made on the meters, and they still have big budget gaps. The issue I have is simple. Selling off all of these things should reduce the price of running Chicago for the taxpayer, hence the taxpayers burden...however, I'll bet any of you right now that despite all of these privatization sales, our income/house/sales/liquor/soda/water/grocery and gasoline taxes will continue to rise. So in other words, they're selling off everything we are paying to support, getting paid big dollars for it on a one time basis, and our burden will remain the same (or increase), despite us having less control as taxpayers to decide who runs the show. If they sell Midway and Midway ups the price of everything 80%, we can't "vote them out"...so now we end up with higher costs on everything we've sold, no control over voting them out for doing so...and our tax burden remains the same, or higher? Laughable that people accept this. Nice try. And don't tell me I can always go to O'Hare if Midway was to do something like that, because O'Hare would increase their prices knowing the only viable alternative already did the same. In the end, we'd lose, just like we lost on the way more expensive meters...yet our taxes didn't fall one bit -- as a matter of fact, they went up despite the City no longer having the meter overhead. I used to park downtown at meters for WAY less than the cost I have to pay now. 25 cents = 6 minutes. 25 cents USED to = 15 minutes. Just to add some reality here... they haven't spent the $1B, in fact, the mayor was pushing to spend a percentage of it for budget gaps (which he should), that equates to something like 20% of it. The rest is still there. Its basically an emergency fund.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 12:28 AM) Game log of the redus game winning home run in the bottom of the 9th. You can check again if you wish, but i went into the game log for everyone of guillen's home runs and he was never apart of a back-to-back-to-back. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/...illoz01&t=b QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 07:33 AM) That really makes me think you are thinking of the game that I was at. http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CH...198508240.shtml Yeah, you are probably right. Weird, I thought for sure it was Guillen, but I must have mixed some childhood memories somehow. I can even see the HR in my head, but it must not have been the same as the back-to-back game.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 12, 2010 -> 04:39 AM) The past 5 or 6 years have been a direct lead up to an event like we are about to witness with Sarah Palin. Galvanization of punditry for hyper-partisan stupidity has been translating into rating boons for quite a while now, and not because of entertainment value or integrity. They're not even mouthpieces or anything like that anymore, they're the defacto leadership of both political parties. Pundits set the talking points and how they will be utilized, think the 9/12 project. Palin is simply assuming a role leading up to 2012 where she can get maximum support. Palin supporters are absolutely rabid, and if they can destroy one administration (and they have) it'd make sense to believe they could elect the replacement. Palin is the perfect realization of the inevitable outcome in which a politician would be keen enough, or just in the right place at the right time, to take a media role as a vehicle to the president. Sarah Palin is going to get the Republican nomination in 2012 and she's going to win to presidency. Hard to even know what that is going to be like, but the means to that end have been stirring up for quite a while now. Or, the pendulum will swing, like it always does. At some point, the hyper-partisan schtick will stop working. The GOP had serious control over Congress, and had a real heyday, from the early 90's until around 2006. Then the country decided they hadn't achieved much lately, and it was time for a change. So we got the 2006 and 2008 elections. Some of the GOP reacted by trying to go to the middle, which is the conventional wisdom. But many decided to try something different - go FURTHER away from the current mainstream thinking, and FURTHER to the right. So far, that hasn't worked much for them, at all. And if they continue down this road, it only leads to a regional party, and never again having control of Congress. Therefore, at some point, the GOP leaders will realize they have no choice but to "come to Jesus" (see what I did there?), and get back to what the "middle" actually wants, if they want control again. Palin is a fail in a Presidential race, a big fail, unless Obama shoots a few puppies.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 05:09 PM) 80% of the league was on the juice... Big Mac just happened to be the best at the time in terms of power. I'd bet big money it was a far lower number than that. Hell, the secret testing results were under 10%. I'd go 25% max.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 04:04 PM) I dont think breaking the law has anything to do with baseball, the HOF, or whether a player is HOF worthy. How is a spitball not premeditated? How does a spitball not put their "entire game at an improperly different level of competition"? If anything a spitball is worse. You can scientifically see the difference between a doctored ball and a nondoctored ball. Conversely there is no absolute correlation between steroids and being a better player. There could have been hundreds of players taking steroids who sucked for all we know. the baseball HOF is different than other sports in that it specifically has a character clause. And that is something I love about it. Clearly, people who break the law in order to achieve, are suspect in this area.

Using PED's - that is to say, breaking the law, and breaking the rules in a premeditated fashion, and putting their entire game at an improperly different level of competition... ...is not the same as things like spitballs and a little too much pine tar, that occurs on the field. Making them the same is like making a $300M Ponzi scheme the same as a guy who stole a candy bar. They are clearly, obviously, not the same.

That's a pretty good apology, about what I'd hope for. Still no ticket to the Hall though, not in my eyes. Sorry Mark. I'm glad you are coming clean and moving on with your life, but your reward should not include enshrinement.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 02:57 PM) And if Kenny feels a pitcher is for real, you can hardly argue with his track record on kids. It is amazing how the one's he has kept, versus the ones he dumped, have performed. QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 03:05 PM) If all it took for Gonzalez was Hudson, Flowers, and D2 then that should have been done on Day 1 of the offseason. I don't buy that though, at all. That's paying dimes on the dollar and Hoyer is going to want a make a splash with an Adrian deal. I'm not so sure. I mean, Hudson and Flowers alone are a rarity - very high end catching and pitching talent, that would be cheap and effective (probably) for many years. And Danks added to the mix. I could see that being a very high price to pay for any one player. Win Now doesn't mean win at all costs to the future, that's the extreme end of things.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 02:22 PM) I think this offense on paper, at best, is a very slight improvement over last year's offense, and that's figuring in rebounds from Quentin and Rios against the losses of Dye's 1st half and Thome. The problem is, last year's offense was horrifically bad and Kenny needed to significantly upgrade that, not just marginally upgrade that. Because he didn't do that, and he chose to spend all his money on Mark Teahens and Juan Pierres and bench players instead of getting a real DH to bolster the middle of the order, he has done damage. Aside from the Putz signing, he has spent on luxuries rather than needs. And good lord, I still can't believe we've got $15.25M committed in 2011 to Linebrink, Teahen, and Pierre. For a typically fiscally responsible team, that is absolutely pathetic in this climate, and Pierre and Teahen will combine to make up $9.75M of the $12M Paulie is going to free up after his contract expires. I see no reasonable evidence to assume Pierre is going to even be *as good* as his career numbers (which still aren't very good for a lead-off man) in a tougher league and in a smaller ballpark. I also see no reason to assume that putting Mark Teahen at 3B is going to suddenly turn him into an above-average player. I predict that 1 year from now we'll be sitting here wishing we could unload all 3 of these deals, but we won't be able to since comparable players will all be signing 1-year deals worth half of what these 3 guys are committed. Hm. I disagree with some of this, but I see where you are coming from on the committed money. However, I really don't think all three of those guys end up disappointing. Just seems unlikely to me. More likely, its a mixed bag.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 12:45 PM) Not really, we're friends back from grammar school that recently reconnected. We had a few beers recently and shot the s*** a little. Great guy and worked his way up from nothing. I don't live in his district so I can't even vote for him, but it still makes me sick how Chicago politics works. Glad to see any new blood coming in. I saw an article recently in Crain's, I wish I could find the link... it highlighted a handful of up and coming, younger (relatively) politicians that are steering clear of opportunities to "move up". Mark Kirk (who has since decided to jump in), Forest Claypool and Lisa Madigan were mentioned, along with a few others. You'd think they'd want to move up, except what happens is, they are so jaded over how bad things are in the upper echelons, that they don't want to go into a job that they'd both fail at AND get their names sullied because they can't function within the machine. That's not good. The more new people take a crack at things, the better.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 10, 2010 -> 09:43 PM) Will this kid get drafted #1 without playing high school ball the past two years? I'm not totally familiar with the whole situation. Kids don't usually leave high school early to get their GED and concentrate on baseball like that. I thought that they still needed to get some sort of exemption to do this, and that MLB has to approve it. I hope they don't.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 10:55 AM) Last I heard they wanted Flowers, Danks and Hudson. The only one in there I'd hesitate on, in this case, is Flowers. Hopefully they go back to SD with that package, but replace Flowers with, really, anything at all. Some combo of other players. Might not work, but its worth a shot.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 09:19 AM) Maybe its 30 years of Global Cooling. UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change member professor Mojib Latif - the globe is now in a "cold mode" which could see temperatures falling for between 20 and 30 years. The Daily Mail? I just checked the google news feeds, and the only places this stuff is appearing, at least for now, is blogs, the Daily Mail, and papers with the name "Inquirer" in the title. By the way, I see in my search that this very same scientist who wrote this paper, has also said he indeed believes in global warming, but that these cycles are ALSO part of the picture. This isn't journalism, its a hack job of splicing out what information they prefer to project to make their point. Let me know when we see some actual reporting done on this, showing, you know, the whole picture in all its shades of gray. The main trend still stands - thousands of peer-reviewed academic papers, all in a unison chorus in one direction. On the other side, a few random quotes and some non-scientists making assumptions. No one can know for sure, but I'll take the former before the latter.

QUOTE (La Marr Hoyt HOF @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 07:45 AM) What is the conventional wisdom regarding Kila Ka'aihue? Switch hitter, good OBP, but not as much pop as expected perhaps? Also, know that the Royals released Jacobs, but what are the thoughts here? He hits L, not switch. There are apparently different schools of thought here. KC kept Jacobs around to let Kila cook one more year in AAA, but that ended up being pretty much a fail for both involved. There is potential there for both OBP and power - the question is, is there enough of both for him being an every day 1B. My opinion, based on what I've read in reports, having seen him play, looking at stats, etc., is that he's legit. I think he's a great fit for the Sox, if they can get him. Others, however, seem to think he'd be a mediocre bat for that position, at best. So its all subjective. As it turns out though, the Royals appear ready to give him his shot. There was a huge crowd at 1B previously, now not so much, so he'd be harder to acquire. I'd still try if if were my call, but, I doubt its happening.