NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 10:02 PM) Right here I see no reason why that should be any sort of seasonally adjusted trick like some data is. Housing prices have started to slowly level off in some regions as people come in bargain-hunting. But there's every reason to believe that the foreclosure problem is going to get worse before it gets better. The ARM recasts are just now beginning to roll through, and there are a huge number of borrowers there who are simply underwater and have no reason to pay off the loan. Just look at the numbers: The government has neglected to avoid doing anything that might piss off the banks. That includes anything that would give people legitimate ways out of these loans, even through bankruptcy. They're going to be a major drag for years...and combine that with a weak job market and you've got a recipe for a double-dip, esp. if the government pulls back on the stimulus spending as the 2010 election approaches. I take serious issue with this quote: The first sentence is probably true, as it is for people of any mortgage holding at all. But the second and third are simply not true at all, and I suspect the author of the article took a fact from the Fitch report, and interjected their own conclusion (which is why it isn't a direct quote). A variable rate, interest-only ARM (the kind they are referring to here), have you pay a fixed interest amount for the first X years (1, 3, 5) and no principal. There is NOTHING ADDED TO THE BALANCE. It in fact stays the same, but of course therein lies some risk - that means when the variable rate kicks in, and so does the addition of principal payments, then the payment total goes up, possibly a lot (if the rates have gone up - fortunately for most, they have not). This seriously pisses me off when people write stuff that is manifestly false. It gives people reasons to panic that are completely unfounded in truth. Anyway, here is another thing to consider - many people with ARM's that will reset in the near future, will actually end up SAVING MONEY. The payment will go up only slightly, but because the LIBOR and other pinning rates are still so low, the variable rate will in many cases be less than the locked rate was. For example... if your interest-only payment was $1000 a month with a pegged rate of 6%, and the reset value is LIBOR+2, your new interest rate is actually about 4.5%. That is less than you pay now. But the overall payment still goes up, because you start paying principle, and at an slightly higher pace than a traditional mortgage (X/30 faster). So your payment might become, say, $1200 - but only $800 is interest.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 10:36 PM) Except the Bond markets don't say that one bit. And the housing market doesn't match your dire concerns either - foreclosure rates are pretty stable (small rises and falls, as you indicate), prices have been stable for months, sales of existing homes stable or up for months, new construction still going down quickly (yes, this is a good thing)... everything indicates its hit a bottom, MORE OR LESS (not going to get into which month exactly here, whether it was July, or will be September, or whatever). Now, I do agree that unemployment is the X factor. If it does what the markets are anticipating right now - flirt around the 10% mark, just a bit above maybe, stabilize, then maybe back down mid-next year - then the housing recovery will continue. If unemployment spikes big next year, say above 11%, then the recovery stalls, and the housing markets stays at its lows or dips a bit, depending on how things look.

Anyone know which of our minor leaguers become free agents this offseason? Or who can point me to a place to find out? I'd think some of the AAA guys, like Egbert and maybe Torres, would be eligible.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 09:24 PM) Thankfully that's when a good fraction of the stimulus's actual project/job creation spending will be hitting, but unfortunately most of the tax credits have already hit. The double-whammy of the job losses and the continuing collapse of the housing market, combined with the damage to the commercial real estate markets, could certainly do that. It really is hard to see how we'll get out of this on a long-term basis without cutting off the housing collapse/foreclosures, which just keep going up. A serious green jobs boom might be the only thing I can imagine doing it. continuing collapse of the housing market? where are you seeing any indication of that? You are right of course about the job losses, and the fact that the commercial real estate market still has a lot of risk... but the housing market continuing to collapse? I have seen nothing of that sort. I think the "collapse" went on for quite a while, and it seems an abundance of evidence says that we're flattening and even improving in some areas now.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 02:50 PM) Easy sparky. Just making an observation. No really, I am asking because I want to know, not being snarky. Are you saying what most of the pundits are now, that we're overbought and about to slide down a bit? Or are you saying we are in for a BIG drop?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:55 PM) How many would be killed in a nuclear war at what speed versus how many are killed by the health care crisis at what speed. OK. Now I understand the point. But you still seemed to have missed mine - I wasn't saying Health Care was like the Cuban Missile Crisis. I was pointing out the other parallels in the events at hand. But now that you have overanalyzed it to death, I give up.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 02:33 PM) Did you know the Nikkei rallied 20% or more six times (and 50% or more four times) since the secular bear market began in 1990? And yet the index is DOWN 74% since then? How many of those were labeled "new bull markets" by the talking heads? Same can be said of any index, and for both ups and downs. What is your point?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) I'm still a bit shocked that both Ely and Shelby are still in the system. I mean... i like both those guys, they just seem like people KW would have traded already. Trades need 2 sides. Maybe not a good fit with the teams he has been trading with.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:43 PM) The odd definition of a "Crisis" tehre. Still lost me. What are those numbers supposed to mean?

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:43 PM) Rather than trade anybody with a pulse for "Bad Boy" Milton Bradley, I'd rather we go out and re-sign "Good Guy" Jim Thome for one more year. You'd get all of the OBP that Bradley brings to the table plus more homers and RBIs. That and you'd have arguably the best influence in all of baseball in the clubhouse vs. the worst. Good call. Thome > Bradley hitting-wise anyway, neither can really play defense, and Thome doesn't have the baggage. Plus Thome is a known commodity and they know he works well here.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:41 PM) ^^^ I'd rather go 72-90 with Pods or Kotsay at DH than bring a nutcase douche like Bradley into the clubhouse. Remember when Griffey gushed about how the Sox organization had a "family" atmosphere? That attracts free agents and players with no-trade clauses. Let's not mess that up. I am not saying I want to go 72-90, I am saying that Bradley won't improve your record as a team necessarily, and in fact may hurt it, even if he puts up big numbers. I know lots of people here seem to think baseball is like some video game, but its not - human players have human reactions, and there is a 95% chance that Bradley's emotional issues would throw the clubhouse into a fit, and there is no doubt in my mind that can have serious impact on players' play on the field. Though you are also correct that when you have a good reputation for the clubhouse, it makes sense to protect that, so that you have more available talent.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 10:54 AM) Um, somehow I don't think that's the most apt metaphor. 45,000/year versus a couple hundred million in 5 minutes being the key difference. You lost me - what are you talking about?

QUOTE (almagest @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) Guillen's been as good as any manager at deflecting attention away from his players and to himself. I think if there's any place Bradley could be successful, it's here. I guess it depends on whether the Sox feel he would behave himself. The talent's certainly there, and even though Bradley's having a bit of an off-year, a switch-hitting DH who gets on base a lot and can hit for power is a nice replacement for Thome. Ozzie deflects attention away from players who put in the work and don't complain. Bradley is not that guy. Ozzie would hang him in the press, eventually. He doesn't do prima donna players - see Orlando Cabrera, who Ozzie defended at first, but then stopped defending when Orlando caused problems in his clubhouse (not getting into whether that was right or wrong - just that it simply is).

I like black bourbon.

AJ was looked at as a great teammate in MIN, then had one bad year in SF. Not SEVEN BAD STINTS WITH SEVEN TEAMS. And Jenks had off-field problems, not on-field ones. The only player I've seen the Sox take on who had a bad rep that is in the same genre as Bradley's was Jurassic Carl, and he had issues as it was. But Everett was never seen as a guy who didn't make the effort, or who had a fragile ego - both of which Bradley has, and both of which would be an epic disaster in Chicago and on an Ozzie-coached team. No frickin way.

I would not want Bradley anywhere near the Sox, and he'd never be able to get along with Ozzie anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 11:06 AM) At least to me, I get the impression that KW really likes to trade guys when he thinks their value is peaking. Thus...McCarthy gets moved for Danks before his value goes down. Carter, Poreda, Richard go for Peavy and all 3 of them struggle after leaving. Allen was moved after having a very good season. Gio got moved after a very good season. Ditto DLS. Morel, Griffith, Gonzalez all seem to me to have a strong likelihood of going up in value next eyar. Retherford...maybe, I really just don't know what the org thinks of him. The 2 guys who I'd say have peaked in value right now are Hudson and Flowers. Problem is...we really need both of them. I think it's probably more likely that KW will shake up the big league roster than KW will move minor leaguers at this point. KW does shake up the minors each offseason and in ST, but a lot of those moves are lower level prospects. When you look at the post-season FS Top 25 (to come out soon), and look back at that list on April 1st, I'd be about a quarter of the 40 or so names receiving votes will be elsewhere.

QUOTE (VenomSox @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 10:31 AM) Damn that's the last time I will post anything. To be clear, I wasn't criticizing you posting it - I am glad you did. I was criticizing the writer for not doing their homework or having much of an idea what they were writing about.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 09:13 AM) Whats the deal with this world cup tournament? Is there an age limit? If Wasserman is there, I guess its not amateur only. Its during the MLB season, so it cant be taken too seriously, since so many teams are missing their best players. The Sox sent a few AAA guys who weren't on the 40 man roster - Wassermann, and Josh Kroeger, for example.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 08:32 AM) Barring injury, I would say with about 95% certainty that it is going to be Garcia. I've watched KW do his thing for too long to put 95% certainty on any open position at the end of the season. Its a long offseason. Also, if its Freddy, we won't know until well into ST which version of Freddy we would get.

I saw that Wassermann through 2.2 IP scoreless in the US win that got them to the finals. Finals are this week I think, right?

Well that article is pretty bad. Wrong ages, wrong names, players who aren't in the org anymore, and WTF is someone thinking putting Cole Armstrong and Justin Fuller in the Top 20 names? Oh, and WE DIDN'T SIGN MORGADO. Yikes. FS will be releasing its Top 25 list around the end of the season (we publish in late March, mid-season after the draft, and post-season), which will be a little more meaningful and accurate.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 20, 2009 -> 07:21 PM) He's going to suspend the health care debate to go there? And by suspend the health care debate...we mean "Piss off Dave Letterman"? He is on Letterman on Monday. Perhaps that's part of the plan... This reminds me of the whole Thirteen Days thing. JFK in the middle of the Cuban Missle Crisis, leaves the white house just once - to go visit Daley Senior. Obama in the middle of the health care "crisis", might leave the country just once - to go help Daley Junior.

QUOTE (flavum @ Sep 20, 2009 -> 11:12 AM) 1-4, who cares what order they go in... Buehrle should start opening day for tradition's sake. But after that, it should be 1-2-3-4, and skip the 5th whenever you can. The problem with the Sox is that they don't skip the 5th starter enough. Next year, I want the top four to start at least 33 games. Sort of odd to say this, since we don't know who that 5th guy is yet. Maybe you want to know that before deciding on such a thing?

QUOTE (fren. @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 07:46 PM) Baines' best year doesn't come close to Jeter's best. 29/94/.304/.903/142+ 24/102/.349/.989/153 OPS+ They weren't being serious with the comment, but Baines was a DH and Jeter plays a premium position and has the higher OPS. Me thinks you are taking this a little too seriously.