NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 01:44 PM) Very cool! Do you do any community band playing or anything to keep your chops up? Sadly, no, I haven't picked up a horn in years. I hope to pick it back up again later, maybe when my kid(s) start learning an instrument.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 12:53 PM) He's going to sign a contract worth several million dollars in incentives, in my opinion. I don't think we are interested in spending $4-6 million on another injury-risk starter at this juncture. Not at that price, no. But I don't think he gets that much. I think he gets no more than $1-2M guaranteed, plus incentives, and may not even get a guaranteed major league deal. I might be interested in that $1M+incentives number, as I think he's got more potential to be very good than Garcia does.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 12:48 PM) I don't think he would sign so early...he has nothing to gain by signing early for a low salary. He's got plenty of potential suitors... Bird in hand. In this market, an early offer a little below what you wanted would have to be very tempting.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 10:36 AM) My guess is going to be another of Kenny's favorites, Mr. Andruw Jones. I've seen stories lately of a formerly very good pitcher rehabbing from injury and surgery, who could be had for cheap. That's more what I was thinking here.

Played piano from very young through college, trombone/bass trombone from very young through college as well. Used to be able to play any bass cleff brass instrument at least passably. I've gotten to play on the same stage as some big names in jazz and classical - very fortunate. QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 21, 2009 -> 06:08 PM) Could you read bass cleff? As a converted trumpet player I could only read treble cleff, so either a chart had to already be transposed or I had to rewrite them in treble. Only had to do that a couple times. Playing lead trombone in orchestras, I had to be able to read bass, treble, tenor and alto cleffs. Always hated that crap. Damn Mozart.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 10:47 AM) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2102272_pf.html lol. i guess we can put an end to the 'she wasn't bribed' discussion. she admits it. A few centrist politicians in each party have far too much power in Congress right now, and this is a perfect example. This problem is made worse by two recent changes - the assinine 60-vote cloture rule changes, and the polarization of the party mainlines. What you are left with in those isntances, instead of similarly-minded blocks of congress people working across the spectrum, is one or two politicians who make all the difference, and can ask for anything they want.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 22, 2009 -> 09:37 AM) Oh come on...there are people that actually take the guy seriously? He's reached Harry Caray type status for me...you just watch to be entertained more so than to actually take anything he says seriously... I'd happily be entertained by it, except I think he's serious. He actually believes this s***. It comes off sometimes like parody, but its not.

According to the Trib, the offer on the table is $1M, same as he got last year.

OK so, this email hack story is now appearing in more mainstream news outlets. Seems the emails and the hack are real. I've been reading articles, to see what email excerpts are supposedly problematic. There are the ones saying positive things about the death of this Daly fellow, which is a bit less than classy. There is one about a "nature trick", which seems to represent the change in types of temp records available. So far, I'm not seeing any emails that display any real bias or any files published that show any sort of attempt to distort anything. Yet. That all said, scientists are people, and it certainly wouldn't be a surprise to know that some of them make these studies appear to fit their desired outcome by bending or distorting certain things. It happens. But I haven't seen any evidence in this case yet.

QUOTE (almagest @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 04:50 PM) Somewhat surprised this isn't in here yet... LOL I actually still can't tell for sure if this is parody, a la The Onion, or if this writer is for real. I mean, the article starts with his profile: And his first sentence isn't even grammatically correct: Along with a number of other misspellings and grammatical errors. And if you follow his link to the "source", this is their description of what happened: Um... what? I looked around for this story on any legitimate news sites, and found nothing. At least, not yet.

According to Klapisch's column, Matsui will land with our White Sox. Doesn't jive with other recent statements, but, it would make sense.

I've seen a couple posts here about Kotsay not being able to cover CF. I wouldn't start him there, but as occsional relief for Rios, I think he'd be fine. Rios will probably play 150 games there anyway, and I don't think Kotsay is so bad in CF that 12 games worries me. He's not the CF he once was, but he can cover the position without being a total disaster. Too small a sample size for him for the stats to mean much, so, I am going on what I saw. I'd rather keep De Aza in AAA, for if someone gets hurt. Just my .02.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:51 PM) also a net loss of jobs for a decade. no growth at all. Yup. We got far too service-industry oriented (among other failiings). We have lost the edge we had in the 90's, and need to get back in front on some things. Sadly, we aren't going quickly enough in that direction.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:40 PM) http://www.gallup.com/poll/122627/Obama-Jo...al-Down-49.aspx Uh oh Obama, in the midst of the worst recession since the 30's: 49%. Bush, when the economy was much better, bottomed at 19%. Obama has used up his capital is some stupid ways, but also some smart ones. The 2010 midterms should be a worry for him, but as of right now, he's still not having to worry about re-election. Unless the GOP has some superstar up its sleeve (which is possible), if Obama's popularity stays as-is, he wins easy in 2012. Now, if the economy double-dips and gets uglier than it is now, well, that's another story.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 11:29 AM) well then here's what i dont understand.... 1) how can the stock market be a gauge of a "lost decade" but then be meaningless, economically when its gone up 35% in the past 6 months? All I hear all day, is how the stock markets gains dont mean anything economically to the country. 2) isnt the whole notion of a "lost decade" very subjective? Ok, from 1/1/00 to 1/1/10 the market had 0% growth (or negative growth). However once you factor in yields, you would be positive. Also when the market tanked in April 2009, can we go out to April 2019 and say what an awesome decade's worth of growth. Can't you just pick the start date of your decade analysis to show either outstanding or horrible growth levels? 1) You are playing one side's bias against the other. Neither one says they other makes sense. It is what it is - a lost decade in the US equity markets. How much effect that has economically is a subject of much study and controversy. 2) Yields in the broader equity market, in the modern era, are small. Less than 1% per anum, if you average it out, I believe. Fewer and fewer stocks (common stocks) pay dividends nowadays, and they pay less and less. Some folks see a huge danger in that too, but that's a whole different discussion. The S&P 500 was at 1089 at yesterday's close, and it was at 1400-something 10 years ago - so its lost something like 30%. The dividend yields do not make up much of that, even when compounded. So, its been a net negative decade.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:40 PM) I meant Hudson taking a setup role, but I'll edit that so it sounds less confusing. Ah, so then we agree.

Cook and Wassermann are both guys who probably need a change of scenery, and might even see the majors in 2010 with someone else. I'd wish them both well.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:35 PM) well at least we have a pinch bunter...though im relatively certain ozzie will try to play vizquel 3 times a week at least....while i don't agree with the strategy, at least if ozzie is going to be asking guys to bunt and hit and run etc...at least we have a guy who can actually do it, and not brent lillibridge If he is the utility infielder, playing 3 times a week makes sense. One game in every 10 or so, per skill position player (3x16.2 is 49 games actually starting), plus the occasional PH/PR and late defense type role. Sounds about right to me. And I don't think we're trading Nix, because I don't think he gets you anything in trade anyway. I think he stays with the team, CJ isn't ready yet. Bench of Nix (who can play some corner OF as well as 2B, 3B), Vizquel (all skill IF), Kotsay (all OF, 1B), and the backup C. Gives you pretty good coverage all around.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:29 PM) I really don't think Carrasco has the stuff to work as a setup guy. His main value comes in being able to work 3-4 innings while only giving up a run or two, saving the bullpen and keeping us in the game if the offense makes a comeback. If Hudson is still here I expect Hudson to take that role and perform rather awesomely. Marquez must still be someone the Sox like. If he does get healthy and stay healthy IMO he's better than Torres at least, but the health question is a big one, and on top of that, cracking the Sox rotation would pretty much be a pipedream for him. I'm sure he does have a shot a LR though, but again, that's Carrasco's duty for now. I disagree on Hudson. I think they give him a 7th or 8th inning type role, either part time or full time. Then if successful, he'll move to starter when someone falters. I don't think they'll use him for garbage time, especially since, as you say, Carrasco is pretty ideal for that role.

Santo Luis, but no Shelby? Goofy if you ask me. No surprise with Gartrell though, I didn't know what people were talking about not protecting him. Sox are high on him, it seems.

QUOTE (Sec101Row1 @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 12:06 PM) Someone from the sox told me they've added 5 players to the roster today. The names are in the FS forum. NO Shelby, sort of surprising. No Marrero either, but we aren't sure he had to be yet.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 10:38 AM) I agree on Shelby. I am certain that Viciedo will not be a 3b. Lets hope that he hits enough to be an asset at 1b. Just talked to a Sox scout yesterday and they are very high on Mitchell right now. He said that we will love him. How is it you can be certain? How much have you seen him play? I personally have seen very little, so I don't know. But I got the impression the organization wasn't ready to move him yet, and still thought he might stick there with more work.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 10:39 AM) when you (or others) say that we had a lost decade, what does that really mean? From 1999 to 2009, give or take, the equity markets were essentially unchanged. I believe that is the only 10 year period if its kind since the Depression. That is what he means by the Lost Decade. Historically, over longish periods of time, like 10+ years, you could rely on the broader markets to make you about 7 to 10% on equity year over year, with some variance if you played with the 10 years you picked. But zero gain, the complete loss of the equity premium, for 10 years, is unique.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 20, 2009 -> 09:07 AM) Well said. And I don't know how many times I have to reiterate this, but while deflation may be feared -- it's NEVER going to happen -- especially when taking into account the flood of currency from the stimulus amongst many other factors at play, it's just NOT a reality at this time. What they need to worry about, because it is a reality, is spiraling out of control inflation. Yes, when the economy does recover (and believe it or not, it will, at some point), inflation will be a big worry.

I've got a great one, but it shows my age a bit. It was also a non-baseball thing, that ended up effecting the game on the field. I was at a game at the old park, probably in the mid-80's or so. It was seat cushion day, which they don't do anymore, and this game is the reason why. Something happened on the field where an ump made a call against the Sox. Crowd booed, and the manager (was either LaRussa or Fregosi at the time, I don't recall which) rushes the field to argue. As they are arguing, we see one guy in the UD hurl his seat cushion like a frisbee, which lands right on the infield. Almost instantly, hundreds more of these seat cushion frisbees go flying onto the field - it looked like it was snowing seat cushions (they were white with the old batter man logo). Game is then stopped by the umpires, and the PA announcer comes on and says if we continue to do this, the Sox will have to forfeit the game. So it stopped after a few minutes, they picked up all the seat cushions, and continued play. A few straggler ones flew onto the field at other points in the game, for instance after a Jerry Hairston home run, as I recall, but nothing too bad.