southsider2k5

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 01:44 PM) If I am adidas, there is no exception. UCF probably did lie during recruiiting, but if I am an administrator for UCF and I have a recruiter telling this kid he can do what he wants, and adidas pointing to a signed contract, there is only one way to solve this. Goodbye Marcus, or wear adidas. A sponsor isnt going to want its direct rival to be sharing the spotlight. And especially now, everytime he steps on the court this is going to come up somewhere, somehow, and Adidas is going to end up looknig like the b**** because they let it slide. No way in hell I let this happen if I am in the front office There is a very good chance something like this could have been a deal breaker during recruiting. If he was lied to, you can bet he leaves, and the university ends up burning a lot of future bridges with athletes who are thinking if they are willing to lie to MJs kid, are they telling me the truth?

Perhaps you are trying to indicate that would be wrong with a real child?

QUOTE (East Side Z @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 01:27 PM) Do you think Beckham is a smart guy? I think a better question would be what you have see that makes you think he isn't?

QUOTE (East Side Z @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) Nix at 3rd ,Beckham at SS and Getz at 2nd. Nix at 3rd would be a mistake of epic proportions. He would be a huge negative both defensively and offensively.

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) Yesterday, McNeil and Spiegel were debating the wisdom of Versteeg getting sent off after "retaliating" for the big (but clean) hit on Toewes. Today, Rosenblum chimes in and (with the full benefit of hindsight) is all against it. http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune....ing-a-game.html I'm really not adamant for or against fighting, but I had absolutely no problem with what Versteeg did, even the way things turned out. I like the (mostly internal) message it sent. This early in the season, I think you can afford to lose a few battles if it helps win the war in the end. Any thoughts? You have to protect your guys. The problem is with Burish and Eager out is they don't have anyone who can really do that.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 10:59 PM) Bad contract for almost as bad contract doesn't even help the team that much. That is what is so frustrating about this whole situation, is that more and more it looks like the window is only open for this year, then it's closed. This off-season is the key. It's about fitting Toews-Kane-Keith all in for next year. It can be done, but it means Sharp-Versteeg-Barker-Madden-Ladd are all probably playing somewhere else next year. Looking at it optimistically, the cap will stay the same this off-season. The more realistic view point is it drops 2-3 million. Again, lets just say it stays the same. Estimated Cap Hits for 2010 Toews-5.5 Kane-5.5 Keith-5 Campbell-7.1 Hossa-5.2 Huet-5.6 Thats 34 million for 6 players. 22 million left for 18 spots. Oops..... That is why it is so key for some of the young guys to take a big step forward. The numbers work a lot better if a Beech or Aliu contribute.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 07:53 AM) Strasburgs first AFL start? Pretty Good. His second start? Blown the F*** up http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...9&sport=MLB If you know a fastball is coming, you can hit it as a major league baseball player, well unless your name is Josh Fields.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 10:58 PM) He had his moments in a Sox uni but overall he did suck,still have no idea why there's a deep hatred for Swish. OCab sucked too yet there isn't the same hatred for him that Swisher inspires in soxtalk... Between what we traded for Swisher, and what he was billed to be when he arrived here, it is two different stories. And believe me, no one likes Cabrera either.

Meh, wait until you have kids.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 09:54 AM) Executive compensation being what it is is a definite problem, for all the reasons I mentioned. The quote you put here agrees, by the way. You seem to think there is some nice, fat trauma bandage that will fix everything at these companies that were bailed out. That would be nice, wouldn't it? Unfortunately, its not reality, pretty much for any business. There is a LOT wrong there, and paying executives huge money regardless of success or failure is one of those problems. If you can't see that, then I can't help you, and this discussion goes nowhere. And yet by penalizing certain banks, draining their talent, and making them less desirable to work for, the government is concentrating more and more money into the biggest banks. Everything the federal government is doing here is contra to the actual problems at hand. They seem to want to pass this problem off as a few people making too much money, which is so not the big problem here.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) The idea that we should facilitate massive wealth redistribution from all taxpayers to a few wealthy executives who made poor decisions for years is garbage. ss2k5, where is all of this awesome Wall Street talent going to go if they aren't paid tens or hundreds of millions of dollars for creating massive economic bubbles but not wealth? What other market or sector is going to invite them in to run their businesses into the ground? Everyone is missing the really big picture here. Cutting compensation for executives isn't going to change risk taking behavior. There I said it. As long as their performance is tied to stock price by shareholders, stock price is the only thing that matters. Whether they are being paid $500k or $500m, they are still going to take risks to pump up the stock price, especially if other companies in the same industry are out performing by taking bigger risks. The government is even buying into this by firing executives at underperforming companies. And as for the last line, they are obviously being hired somewhere, because they sure wouldn't be quitting a place like BOA if they didn't have another job lined up.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 08:21 AM) This is just not at all correct. First, for any company, saving 10's of millions of dollars is definitely meaningful. It means the ability to hire more people, or buy more equipment, or advertise more, etc. - so there really can be no question it has an impact. And that is far better for the economy than one guy getting that money. Is it a huge overall economic impact? No, but that shouldn't stop it from being made. Companies are made mostly of small spending/saving/investing decisions, and they all matter. Second, you are arguing with thin air on the union thing - I siad before, repeatedly, that the union labor contracts have been part of the problem. Are you saying that these companies should only fix one problem, when they have many? That makes no sense. Third, you say again that the perception is garbage, and yet you still didn't answer to my point on it, whcih I stand by. Showing other executives that taking massive risk means you may get bit in the ass, is definitely a good thing. Putting a band aid on a gashwound does nothing. The perception that executive compensation is the problem is garbage. It just isn't true. Especially when your labor costs are billions over other competitors. It is akin to the idiotic idea that disclosing compensation would somehow stop its growth. At the end of the day, all it means is that people who have no idea how to run a bank and auto companies, are going to end up running them. That is just genius. http://www.thebigmoney.com/features/todays...ing-fat-cat-pay

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 07:53 AM) Totally disagree. Sending a message to other executives to keep themselves in check, to not take companies barrelling down on immense risk and not caring because of their personal parachute, absolutely has value. It has value in the same sense that any criminal punishment would - sends a message to would be criminals to think twice. Now, as it happens, I also agree with the move on its own, sole merits. You are into the government for billions because you failed catastrophically as a company - well, guess what? Now we, the taxpayers, own you, and you have to live by our rules, until you can get back up on your own two feet. Deal with it. The idea that somehow the compensation packages of executives have pretty much any financial impact on the bottom line of these companies is a joke. GM as a company had revenue of $150 billion in 2008. Even if you want to use the extreme number of $100million, you are still talking about less than 1 tenth of 1 percent of the bottom line. The irony is that you can make a much, much better argument for the impact of the union negotiated wages having a much larger impact on the bottom lines of GM, and where is the outcry to limit their compensation, or to have the government take them over? Like I said, the perception is garbage.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 23, 2009 -> 02:58 AM) If I'm the Sox I offer a Viciedo type contract but loaded with incentives, to make everyone happy but nothing near what the Yankees and Red Sox will offer. Though, ever since Jose fizzled out in NY, haven't these super Cuban prospects (Alexei, Viciedo) been speculated on getting big contracts from bidding wars and coming up with far less? I just wish Torres was his agent, we'd have him wrapped up by now. There also hasn't been a young pitcher with a 102 mph fastball come out of Cuba either.

Ah, yes. Nick Swisher everyone.

QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 10:31 PM) There is a sample size issue with looking at Nix vs. RHP in 2009. He actually hit RHP better than LHP in his minor league career. Yeah, Ozzie pretty much saved him for optimal ABs versus righties.

Junk in the trunk?

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 09:33 AM) He was a rookie this year. He had an OBP of .340 in the second half of this year. It just completely baffles me how people continue to ride this guy. Look, he'll never be an all-star. We get it. But we're also not the Yankees, we can't have 9 all-stars hitting 20 HRs a year for us. Getz looked fine to me in the field and does little things much better than Nix; making contact, hitting behind runners, bunting etc...Getz is a baseball player. He plays the game the right way. He also was 25/27 in SB this year and missed a bunch of time. What that tells me is if he can raise his OBP and stay healthy he could potentially steal 35 bases a year. You put him in the 9 spot in our lineup and I'll take it. I've said it plenty of times but Chris Getz reminds me of the prototypical Minnesota Twin little infielder that doesnt seem to have great tools but just gets the job done and we all wonder how or why. Then we complain we don't have anyone like that blah blah blah. Well now we do. I'd think more people would be happy about that and recognize that what someone does in their rookie year plagued with injuries shouldn't be viewed as their ceiling. Nix supposedly has so much room to grow but somehow Chris Getz has topped out? Sorry, I just don't buy it. Getz is a gamer, I expect him to have a solid 10 year career in this league. Good call. And with a team like we have, I have no problem with Chris Getz getting 500 ABs next year, assuming no large regression.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:31 AM) Well, you're missing the big one. If they were to waive him, obviously no one would pick him up. However, then he can be sent to Rockford, where he does not count against the cap. My guess is that's when you eat the contract and let him enjoy busing around the midwest. It is worth eating $2.8 million a year for two years to let the guy walk away? Or do we wait and see if we can do a bad contract for a bad contract kind of a dump?

So who wants to throw their predictions for this NBA season out there, or just for the Bulls?

QUOTE (RibbieRubarb @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 04:17 PM) Stop bringing an escort and maybe you can attend again... I want my $75 back!

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 03:31 PM) I remember when Soxfest was fun. I haven't been in years, since they added the extra $75 a person for a weekend stay.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 03:57 PM) Not really, not in terms of what the money will go to, or in terms of the effect on perception, which is key here. Perception a garbage reason for this.

This is his agent trying to get a bidding war started, nothing more.

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/press...21496-103931394