Pants Rowland

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 11:27 AM) The Mets need him the most, but will they give up their top prospectS for him? Cuz that's what it's going to take. I hope so, for the White Sox sake. But I could see them hanging on to him at least until ST. To me the best long term scenario for the White Sox is if Santana stays with the Twins this year (and Liriano struggles to regain his form) and they lose him in free agency to any team in the NL. Unfortunately, the Cubs are one of the few teams likely to compete for his services so the next best thing would be a trade now to another NL team with the prospects to get it done. Hopefully, whatever they get for him will end up having average careers in the twin cities.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3220115

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 01:43 PM) You have even more leverage in housing I think. From a personal standpoint, when I bought my house I got a great deal because 1. I knew the couple had just purchased another place and couldnt afford the dual mortgages, 2. I offered to close in 10 days, and 3. the winter is a lousy housing market. I walked away at least 10 times before we reached an agreement, and still had some trouble when the docs had to be signed, but eventually they did what their only option was to do, sell it to me. I agree. With cars, the market is typically more patient. With housing, however, the sellers are typically far less sophisticated (even with broker representation) and constrained by personal deadlines. That is a great point on a short term closing. If you have the means to close on a deal in 2 weeks or less, you possess a significant advantage over many other buyers. There is a good chance you can knock more off the price by eliminating that extra 3-4 weeks of uncertainty associated with a conventional closing timeline. When did you close on your home, Rock?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 01:00 PM) Pants, do you generally do real estate in the burbs or in the city? Nationwide. I work for a real estate investment firm that acquires, develops and loans on various property types. I am responsible for selling the product when the time is right so I frequently talk with commercial brokers and investors from all over who look at various types of commercial real estate investments. Although I do not necessarily focus on residential product, the housing industry and the subprime lending crisis has been at the forefront of most discussions and continues to impact all real estate in one way or another. I have been hearing the same thing over and over recently that many condo developments or conversions are sucking wind. Many investors are already willing to get out at 60 to 80 cents on the dollar in some markets with many more holdouts likely to capitulate as the economy continues to plod along. The consensus is if you have some funds stashed away, you can pick up some nice product later this year and next at significantly reduced prices.

QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 10:59 AM) Agreed, great information there. I suppose it isn't terrible to take a few more months to save up towards a down payment and look around at what I really want. Not terrible at all. Owning is a wise decision in the long run, but there is also a significant element of independence that goes with renting. Once you buy a place, you give up a portion of that independence. You need to pay a mortgage, insurance, real estate taxes, and maintenance. In addition, the maintenance reduces your free time. Further, the down payment effectively takes your liquid cushion of funds and places it in a very illiquid asset. All these variable make it tougher to change jobs, go out of town on the weekends, throw parties, etc. The bigger the mortgage, the more magnified the loss of certain freedoms become. There is no need to rush anything until you are comfortable with the decision you are about to make. I hope I am not scaring you with this laundry list, but it is always better to go into these things with eyes wide open. Taking your time will help educate and prepare you to make a sound decision on your ultimate investment At risk of droning on and lecturing too much, remember to run away from a deal when someone tries to pressure you into signing any type of contract before you are ready. When they tell you that there are three more buyers that are ready to make offers on a place, the best response is to say 'no thanks, I can't compete with that type of demand'. The owner of the first house we nearly bought was playing hardball with us during the initial price negotiation. Once we agreed on price and were in the inspection period, we found some problems with the roof and decided to terminate the contract. It was eye-opening to see how much $$ the seller was willing to give up once we did not want it anymore. If you can fake indifference all the time, you will be well-served.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2008 -> 11:17 PM) Worth tossing into the mix is Merrill Lynch's latest evaluation of the housing market. It ain't pretty. Balta. I just read through this thread and you are spot on with your comments. I work in commercial real estate and the overriding message I hear from investors is that things are not getting better any time soon. In particular, that applies to the multi-family housing market. Many markets are either overbuilt or overconverted to condos. In particular, South Florida, Phoenix and L.A. MSAs, and many Texas markets have been hit hard in the housing sector. I do not know how the variables will hit the Chicago MSA, but I think now is the perfect time to wait and do your homework, not rush into a purchase or a mortgage. First of all, the subprime crisis is going to have a much more significant impact on liquidity in the short term. The Federal Reserve Board's recent actions will not immediately translate into lower rates for someone looking to leverage their investment. Many lenders are still reeling from the rash of foreclosures and have really not started offering the most competitive rates as of yet, even if they are at a four year low as of this AM. Further, in many markets, foreclosures are expected to peak this spring. This is going to force a lot of homeowners struggling meet their mortgage payments to sell at a loss on their investment. The combination of desperate homeowners who need to get out from under a mortgage along with those who end up giving the note back to the bank is going to put considerable downward pressure on pricing. Banks do not want to carry housing inventory and are more likely to sell the house at a loss than have to carry the real estate tax and insurance costs indefinitely. All the while, some homeowners are going to try for a compromise and offer their houses and condos for rent. This will increase the options for renters and give them an advantage when negotiating lease terms. To me the time to target is about 6 months from now. In the mean time, I would identify the neighborhoods that fit your needs the most and hook up with a local agent who will help you start to look at product. By the time you are ready to buy a good deal with attractive financing, you will be educated as to the quality of what is available and reasonable pricing for the current state of the economy. Don't trust a lot of these experts who slam Merrill Lynch for being pessimistic. The National Association of Realtors is an association of brokers. It is in their best interest to dismiss negative housing reports and try to keep things from spiraling out of control. Finally, when you do decide to buy and finance, take a close look at the 5 and 7 year ARM options. If this really is your first place, odds are you are not planning on staying there more than 5 years. The ARMs that have raised all kinds of trouble are the shorter term options, not the 5 and 7 variety. The spread between a 30 year fixed rate mortgage and a 5 year ARM is roughly half a percent. On a $200K loan, that is another grand in your pocket every year to build equity toward your next purchase. Good luck.

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 06:40 PM) sabathia/sheets, buehrle, vazquez? Sorry. I misread the original comment. As far as my avatar goes... http://youtube.com/watch?v=KwSOx_FYZkc Enjoy.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jan 18, 2008 -> 07:53 AM) Idonno if we add Sabathia or Sheets next year in place of lets say Contreras.... We have 3 bonafide top of the rotation starters plus now what seems a pretty solid bullpen. Only thing that needs to be done is to ditch Konerko for Kendric and one of Morales/Kotchman lol if that was even possible. Who is the third?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 17, 2008 -> 03:44 PM) Like, say, the 2006 Detroit Tigers, with Kenny Rogers, Jeremy Bonderman, and that Justin Verlander dude? (Bonderman, btw, is only about 3 months older than Floyd). Apples and Oranges?

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Jan 17, 2008 -> 08:27 AM) If they are relying on Marshall and Gallahger their season is in trouble anyway. I believe they will include something to get back Mora to add depth to their bench and include Pie. Like relying on two virtual rookies and a senior citizen for your 3rd through 5th spot in the rotation?

QUOTE(JoshPR @ Jan 17, 2008 -> 07:51 AM) Jaime Navarro played in 1982 with the Sox? No. My time following the Sox goes back to roughly that season. I can not remember hating anyone from 1982 to the present nearly as much as I hated Navarro when he was here.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 12:35 PM) I almost don't want to distract from the topic at hand...but here's a bit on E. Santana and how the Angels seem pretty happy with his performance this winter. Way to hijack a thread. Thanks for ruining everyone's fun!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 10:54 AM) The way to get ourselves on lists like this one, where in a few years we have a few of these top latin american prospects, is to do exactly that. Yes, it's a crapshoot, yes, we'll spend some money on people who fail, but if we sign 3 a year, and maybe 1/3 gets to AAA as a high prospect...then suddenly, after 4-5 years of this, we have a highly ranked guy coming up through our system ready for KW to swap for someone important every year. Anyone have an idea the financial investment it takes to consistently sign and develop players from the D.R.? What about Venezuela? Is there a difference in cost or is it roughly the same? I know there are schools set up by the teams and I am wondering how much more viable it is for the Sox to establish a steady network versus any other team out there.

QUOTE(ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 10:37 AM) haha well some girls in my hall once flooded the hall (on accident) and then decided to use it as a slip and slide...needless to say the ra's were not pleased but my suite and the other guys down the hall didnt seem to mind Some friends of mine rolled up some sod that was recently planted in front of an old apartment complex and sodded the area around the RA's door.

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 10:51 AM) what did they say in the update? nevermind, just heard. "bruce levine is reporting the sox are looking at rhp bartolo colon" How long before someone else signs him and we start a 30 page thread complaining how the Sox let him get away?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 10:15 AM) Ah hell. Poor choice of words. No worries. I am just teasing. I understood what you meant.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 16, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) I don't know, but this off season we've signed a few from the Dominican Republic. The DR breeds great ballplayers. So says Jimmy the Greek.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 05:29 PM) I was about to come in here and tell everyone to give the PK to LAA talk a rest, then I noticed that it was all pee talk and love thy fellow soxtalker stuff. Carry on. Next time you show up you might find those two threads merged into a peeing on fellow Soxtalkers you love discussion!

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 04:11 PM) That's funny, I luv me some Pants!

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 01:06 PM) It is somewhere... ...wait, that's not right. I luuuuuvvvv "Corn"!

QUOTE(JuiceCruz16 @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 02:00 PM) The "milkman" was alright, he did seem fat and out of shape, maybe that's why he turned some people off. Just had bad knees if I recall correctly. Really could hit the ball though.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 15, 2008 -> 10:21 AM) No, not at all. I'm not trying to say that you are, "by default," wrong, because I am right. I'm trying to coax some more specific information or examples out of you as I feel I have proven my point to a far greater degree than you have. I have a BA in History, with a concentration in US History and Mexico and Latin American History. I studied the region for the better part of two and a half years, and at no point in my studies or education did I ever get the impression (or was I given the impression) that ANY nation in Latin America, including Mexico, could hold a candle to the US either militarily or economically. I've listed for you a general description of the economic, political, and military plights of nearly all of Latin America, including specific examples. I've also listed for you the great expansion that took place during the period by the US, as part of its' philosophy of Manifest Destiny, basically in the face of Mexico and any other regional "power." I've explained to you that I am not arguing that the US was a "world" superpower by any means in the mid-19th century, but that indeed it was a regional power- the only regional power- and yet you've continued to allude to the US's power on a world level as opposed to what this argument was originally about, the New World region. If you're claiming that it's difficult to have a discussion with me, I think, likewise, it is difficult to have a discussion on this topic with you. You're countering my points with vagaries about "Spanish-backed nations" that could challenge the US both militarily and economically at the time, and point the the fact that the Spanish American War was a "bloody mess," that that somehow shows equality between the US and Mexico militarily or economically. I simply don't think there is ample (or any, for that matter) proof that such an assertion is accurate. And you continuing to repeat it, but offering little in the way of actual examples doesn't make it any more accurate. Sorry to have started a war of words. Here is a question for you. What were the primary reasons for the United States' status as a developing (if not established) power in the mid-19th century? Was it the agrarian system of the south or the industrialization of the north?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 14, 2008 -> 08:41 PM) Well, my guy was Richardson. He's a social democrat but has a history of balancing budgets and encouraging business growth, and has an OK record on the environment (not great though). Combined with an impressive background ranging from SecEnergy to US Congressman to Governor of a growing, diverse and culturally torn state, I thought he was the best candidate available. But he proved unable to survive in the era of TV. At this point, I'd prefer Obama or McCain. I'll probably vote for either of them if they make it. If they both make it, probably Obama. And you? I do like Paul quite a bit, although I diverge from him greatly on immigration, abortion and gun control stances so I am still undecided. I am with you on Richardson. He and Biden were probably the most qualified to do the job. Unfortunately, he looked awful on TV physically. That doesn't matter to me personally but it impacts the electorate. I think he also hurt himself in the debates by using them as a forum to say everything on his mind rather than calmly answering questions. Ron Paul does it too much as well. I loved McCain in 2000 and shake my head at what he has become since then. I wish he had accepted the Reform Party's invitation and run against Gore and Bush as a third party candidate. I think he could have won, or at least kept Dubyah out of office. Now he seems like a sad case with the pandering and toeing the party line In short, I am getting to the "none of the above" feeling on this election.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 14, 2008 -> 08:19 PM) Perhaps the largest reason that slavery met such a quick formal decline is because of it ending in the last "civilized" nation in 1863. You may be right, but in 1863, I am no so sure that the U.S. was that much more civilized than many of our new world neighbors. There were some very educated, slave-owning nobles all over latin america who operated their nations in a fashion similar to the south. Like you said, we have the benefit of hindsight but really can never know how things would have played out.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 14, 2008 -> 06:03 PM) He makes some great points. And I gave him some serious thought for a while as a candidate - my posts in here could prove that. But upon further, deeper review, he seems to me to lack the leadership skills necessary to be President. I think if you had a more viable candidate who was serious about reducing government waste and scope, he'd be a good guy to have in your administration. May I ask who you will support, assuming you get the chance come primary day? Just curious.