JUGGERNAUT

Does Burke have to clear waivers if he goes back down?

I never said it was the end all place to look for wage growth in the new millenium. All I said is that it was the driving force behind it in the 90's. It appears you agree. The problem is that govt spending didn't decrease at the time IT wages were declining. So you had the triple whammy: increased govt spending, decreased wage growth, & decreased tax revenues. You can't sustain any economy with the formula. It's a recipe for disaster. Now with outsourcing throw in, tax revenue is expected to decline even faster. That's why Lou Dobbs keeps sounding the alarm along with the WSJ. Outsourcing & automation affect all highly skiiled labor areas. Not just IT.

From 218 births of minors in VA to this .. what the hell is going on? Is it simply that all this stuff has been happening forever & we're just better at reporting it today or is there something more to this? Lab rat time.

Willie Harris RF 1.94, ZR .816. Horrible! He's not a CFer. :puke In 148 innings, 1 assists, 31 PO. Carlos Lee RF 2.09, ZR .869. In 521 innings, 5 assists, 1 dp, 113 PO. Super-sizing Harris's numbers to Lee's & you get 2 fewer assists, & about 10 fewer POs. That's horrible for a CFer.

I really think you should look at the A's game logs & read how many times Dye's hits were the difference in a game this year That's the part of this you're not understanding. How much does one player's presence in the lineup make to the team. You argue that Maggs is that #1 player on the SOX. I argue that Frank is. I point to Maggs having an 830 OPS at home in 2001 as evidence. You mention all these intrinsic things about Frank's 2002 year except the raw numbers (77R 28HR 92RBI 88W). Again using RPG as a comparative measure, Maggs performed about 25% better. But in 2003 Frank took the lead again performing about 6% better than Maggs. Now in 2004 Frank is crushing Maggs. RPG stops when a player sits, so Maggs current value is what he earned before the DL. Frank is performing 67% better than Maggs. Maybe Maggs will come off the DL & surprise us all, but I doubt it. Historically it takes hitters quite some time when the come off the DL to get their timing back. It's like ST all over again. Some cheat (Sammy with the cork bat) but I don't think Maggs would ever do that.

Tex, look this is a sport message board. If we were in SL&P if never would have gotten out of hand. But we're not we are in PHT. Smack & all the other BS is par for the course. I don't take it personally & you shouldn't either. I don't even think you're a bad person. You're a SOX fan. That's one thing we have in common. Early on when you erroneously paraphrasing my comments I pointed in out in my reply. It's pretty obvious & you can just look over the thread to see for yourself. When you repeatedly continue to do it I lost some respect for you so I said why bother? It's not necc to do so. I don't believe I will ever do business with you & I doubt you will ever do business with me. My line of work puts people out of jobs. SS knows this from yrs past. I've yet to have a contract to where the net effect has been anything other than the company cutting workers as a result of IT work I did for them. I ask God's forgiveness for that consequence all the time but in reality I don't have any control over it. When I worked for Fortune 100 companies several years ago the work I did led to 1000's of job losses. The worst part about my sector of work is the better you get it the quicker you can figure out how many jobs will be replaced. Now even my sector is getting out-sourced so who knows what the future holds. I have never failed to complete a project or fullfill the terms of a contract. Maybe now you have a better understanding that in my sector the end client is the most important client & the middle-men are of no more value to you than you are to them. In the cases where a contract was ended with a middle-man it was always on good terms with a letter of recommendation. They understood the situation & realized I was not at fault. In my sector they don't expect you to give up a high paying contract out of loyalty. Especially when they are hard pressed at the time to find a new one. They don't expect you to wait on a fence for them so that you can remain doing business with them. Now if you're serious about being honest then when you make any reference to what I've just said you will leave the quote intact.

Brandon just answer one question. If 23% & 33% differentials between the #1 & #2 guys on a team don't mean anything than how many wins does that team have if that #1 is replaced with say another guy with only a 2% & 3% differential? If you want look through the A's game logs & see how many types Dye as factored into a win. I don't hate Maggs. I felt the SOX got a bargain in 2002 at 6 mil, & felt they broke even with his production in 2003. So far in 2004 the SOX have gotten the raw end of the deal. I hope he comes back & challenges Frank for league MVP. He's going to get his money from the Mets regardless of what he does so he might as well go out on top.

If I'm KW I would try to get Cameron from the Mets. A player doesn't go from 5.17 RPG to 3.87 RPG overnight like that. It's obvious he's struggling at Shea. Even so he's still 4th on the Mets in TB (76) with 22 rbi's. I sure do like his 2001-2003 #'s vs ALC: @ the Cell 1427 OPS @ the Jake 1209 OPS @ the Com 1024 OPS @ the Metro 956 OPS I would argue that trading for a 2-time Gold glove wining CF (2001, 2003) would be more valuable to the White Sox toward a pennant than a 5th starter. Excellent jumps, vast territorial range, & more run saving web gems than just about any other player. No one came close in 2003 to the number of catches Cameron had. If the Mets were willing to throw in some cash I think it's worth to get a gold glove CF on the SOX. He's owed 14.666/2 yrs. If the Mets were to throw in say 3 mil the SOX should do it.

Protected by Carlos Lee? He's currently hit cleanup on the A's. Dye would be protected by Uribe (#2) & Thomas (#4) who gave up #3 to Maggs. Reality says lets deal with 2004 since this is a hypothetical pertaining to this year's club.

Brandon does touch on something that is important for the Cell: defense. Part of the equation for determining whether Maggs is worth 20-25% of the SOX payroll includes how much does he factor in saving runs? He is 2nd to Carlos in web-gems. I think we can all agree on that. His ability to make catches at/over the fence/wall is poor. All in all he doesn't offer the SOX much in SB's (9) or in the glove to suggest he's a major factor in saving runs. His ZR is currently .874 where as Lee's is .869 or about a a 1% difference.

Are you really that stupid to where you can't recognize a sarcastic & parodic characterization vs a quote? It's one thing to make reference to what someone said in a paraphrase by referring to their identidy & quite another to make an obvious sarcastic reference to what they said. The only reason why the quote function was used is to save me time.

I never asserted that. ALL that I asserted is that Dye at 11.5 mil has proven to be more valuable to the SOX then Maggs at 14 mil. And looking ahead, Dye at less than 33/3 will be more valuable to the SOX then Maggs at 75/5. After looking at the projected FA list for 2004-2005 Dye isn't even at the top of my list

please .. it hurts too much Stats: 2004 H 993 OPS, A 744. A's team OPS 792, SOX team OPS 831 OPS at parks that compare with the SOX: Arlington 1539 OPS, Edison 972 OPS vs Flyball 1057, vs Finesse 1216 A safe estimate would be H 1042, A 780 with the SOX.

How many wins do the A's have in Beane's tenure? How many MVP's have come out of the A's in that time? Now compare that to the SOX. Did you know Beane said publicly recently he was very happy that he signed that 3 yr extension to Dye when he did? But of course the fact that Dye has 23% more TB than any other player on the A's right now doesn't mean anything. In 2003 Maggs had less than 2% more TB than Carlos. In 2004 Maggs has 30% fewer TB than Frank & 19% fewer than Carlos. Has he been on the DL that long? Is it just possible that his 7% decline in RPG in 2003 is a glimpse of the fewer for a player who was never drafted & signed with the White Sox as a free agent?

2004-2005 might be the best FA pool of talent that KW has had available to him as GM. Some have been signed since his report but it's still a good one because it lists the ages. KW can easily get a solid arm & a solid bat for 15 mil from this list. http://espn.go.com/gammons/s/2002/1127/1467898.html Potential free agents at the end of the 2004 season Kerry Wood, ChC, RHP, 28* Matt Clement, ChC, RHP, 31* Ryan Dempster, Cin., RHP, 28* Odalis Perez, L.A., LHP, 27* Javier Vazquez, Mon., RHP, 29* Pedro Martinez, Bos., RHP, 34* Derek Lowe, Bos., RHP, 31* Curt Schilling, Ari., RHP, 38* Matt Morris, St. L., RHP, 31* Kris Benson, Pit., RHP, 30* Russ Ortiz, S.F., RHP, 31* Eric Milton, Min., LHP, 30* Brad Radke, Min., RHP, 32* Freddy Garcia, Sea., RHP, 29* Scott Williamson, Cin., RHP, 29* Bobby Howry, Bos., RHP, 32* Jose Jimenez, Col., RHP, 32* Braden Looper, Fla., RHP, 30* Felix Rodriguez, S.F., RHP, 31* Troy Percival, Ana., RHP, 36* Robb Nen, S.F., RHP, 35* Mariano Rivera, NYY, RHP, 35* Jason Varitek, Bos., C, 33* Paul Konerko, ChW, 1B, 29* Derrek Lee, Fla., 1B, 30* Richie Sexson, Mil., 1B, 30* Carlos Delgado, Tor., 1B-DH, 32* Jose Vidro, Mon., 2B, 31* Mike Lowell, Fla., 3B, 31* Corey Koskie, Min., 3B, 32* Eric Chavez, Oak., 3B, 27* Adrian Beltre, L.A., 3B, 26* Aaron Boone, Cin., 3B, 32* Troy Glaus, Ana., 3B, 28* Cristian Guzman, Min., SS, 27* Orlando Cabrera, Mon., SS, 30* Nomar Garciaparra, Bos., SS, 32* Trot Nixon, Bos., OF, 31* Carlos Beltran, K.C., OF, 28* J.D. Drew, St. L., OF, 29* Magglio Ordonez, ChW, OF, 31* Garret Anderson, Ana., OF, 33* Geoff Jenkins, Mil., OF, 31* * Opening Day age in 2005 A recent study of all hitters since 1980 showed a definite decline in power performance -- as measured simply by OPS -- after the age of 33. Here is a more recent breakdown (Jan, 2004): http://kmbumb.people.wm.edu/05agency.html Based only on players currently under a contract through the 2004 season. x-club option for 2005; m-mutual option for 2005; y-player option for 2005. ANAHEIM (5): Troy Glaus, 3b; Shane Halter, 3b; Raul Mondesi, of; Troy Percival, rhp; Aaron Sele, rhp. BALTIMORE (7): Marty Cordova, of; Omar Daal, lhp; Mike DeJean, rhp; Luis Lopez, ss; x-Rafael Palmeiro, 1b; David Segui, 1b; B.J. Surhoff, of. BOSTON (12): Ellis Burks, dh; x-Alan Embree, lhp; Nomar Garciaparra, ss; Derek Lowe, rhp; Pedro Martinez, rhp; Ramiro Mendoza, rhp; Kevin Millar, 1b; x-Bill Mueller, 3b; Pokey Reese, 2b; x-Mike Timlin, rhp; Jason Varitek, c; Scott Williamson, rhp. NEW YORK (7): Miguel Cairo, ss; Tony Clark, 1b; John Flaherty, c; Orlando Hernandez, rhp; x-Travis Lee, 1b; x-Jon Lieber, rhp; Ruben Sierra, of. SEATTLE (11): Rich Aurilia, ss; x-Bret Boone, 2b; Pat Borders, c; Freddy Garcia, rhp; m-Eddie Guardado, lhp; Dave Hansen, 1b; x-Edgar Martinez, dh; Mike Myers, lhp; John Olerud, 1b; Ron Villone, lhp; Dan Wilson, c. TEXAS (10): Doug Brocail, rhp; David Dellucci, of; Brad Fullmer, 1b; m-Rusty Greer, of; Brian Jordan, of; Jeff Nelson, rhp; Herb Perry, 3b; Jay Powell, rhp; Eric Young, 2b; Jeff Zimmerman, rhp. TORONTO (8): Terry Adams, rhp; Dave Berg, ss; Frank Catalanotto, of; Carlos Delgado, 1b; Chris Gomez, ss; Pat Hentgen, rhp; Greg Myers, c; Gregg Zaun, c. NATIONAL LEAGUE ARIZONA (10): Roberto Alomar, 2b; Carlos Baerga, 2b; Danny Bautista, of; Greg Colbrunn, 1b; x-Elmer Dessens, rhp; Steve Finley, of; Brent Mayne, c; Shane Reynolds, rhp; Richie Sexson, 1b; Steve Sparks, rhp. CHICAGO (7): x-Sandy Alomar Jr, c; Mike Jackson, rhp; Billy Koch, rhp; Esteban Loaiza, rhp; Magglio Ordonez, of; x-Cliff Politte, rhp; Jose Valentin, ss. CLEVELAND (5): Jeff D'Amico, rhp; Tim Laker, c; m-Omar Vizquel, ss; Rick White, rhp; Bob Wickman, rhp. DETROIT (4): Alan Levine, rhp; Greg Norton, 3b; Danny Patterson, rhp; x-Ugueth Urbina, rhp. KANSAS CITY (9): Kevin Appier, rhp; Carlos Beltran, of; m-Juan Gonzalez, of; Jason Grimsley, rhp; x-Curtis Leskanic, rhp; m-Joe Randa, 3b; Desi Relaford, ss; Matt Stairs, of; Kelly Stinnett, c. MINNESOTA (6): x-Henry Blanco, c; x-Cristian Guzman, ss; Corey Koskie, 3b; Terry Mulholland, lhp; Jose Offerman, 1b; Brad Radke, rhp. OAKLAND (4): Jermaine Dye, of; x-Chris Hammond, lhp; x-Eric Karros, 1b; Damian Miller, c. TAMPA BAY (5): Brook Fordyce, c; John Halama, lhp; x-Tino Martinez, 1b; Trever Miller, lhp; Rey Sanchez, ss. ========================================== LOS ANGELES (8): Wilson Alvarez, lhp; Adrian Beltre, 3b; Jose Hernandez, 3b; Todd Hundley, c; Jose Lima, rhp; Odalis Perez, lhp; Paul Shuey, rhp; Robin Ventura, 1b. NEW YORK (9): Ricky Bottalico, rhp; Scott Erickson, rhp; John Franco, lhp; m-Al Leiter, lhp; x-Steve Trachsel, rhp; x-Mo Vaughn, 1b; David Weathers, rhp; Gerald Williams, of; Todd Zeile, 1b. PHILADELPHIA (8): Rheal Cormier, lhp; Doug Glanville, of; Roberto Hernandez, rhp; Kevin Millwood, rhp; Eric Milton, lhp; Tomas Perez, ss; Todd Pratt, c; x-Billy Wagner, lhp. ATLANTA (6): Antonio Alfonseca, rhp; J.D. Drew, of; Julio Franco, 1b; Eli Marrero, c; Russ Ortiz, rhp; x-John Smoltz, rhp. CHICAGO (10): m-Moises Alou, of; Matt Clement, rhp; Alex Gonzalez, ss; Tom Goodwin, of; x-Mark Grudzielanek, 2b; Todd Hollandsworth, of; Kent Mercker, lhp; Rey Ordonez, ss; Glendon Rusch, lhp; Todd Walker, 2b. COLORADO (9): m-Jeromy Burnitz, of; m-Vinny Castilla, 3b; Royce Clayton, ss; Shawn Estes, lhp; Jeff Fassero, lhp; Denny Hocking, ss; Steve Reed, rhp; Mark Sweeney, of; Turk Wendell, rhp. HOUSTON (6): x-Craig Biggio, of; Roger Clemens, rhp; x-Richard Hidalgo, of; Jeff Kent, 2b; Dan Miceli, rhp; Jose Vizcaino, ss. ST. LOUIS (8): Chris Carpenter, rhp; Cal Eldred, rhp; Steve Kline, lhp; Ray Lankford, of; Mike Matheny, c; Matt Morris, rhp; x-Woody Williams, rhp; Tony Womack, ss. SAN DIEGO (7): x-Rod Beck, rhp; Sterling Hitchcock, lhp; x-Trevor Hoffman, rhp; Antonio Osuna, rhp; Ismael Valdes, rhp; David Wells, lhp; x-Jay Witasick, rhp. SAN FRANCISCO (9): x-Jason Christiansen, lhp; Deivi Cruz, ss; x-Marquis Grissom, of; Dustin Hermanson, rhp; Robb Nen, rhp; Neifi Perez, ss; Felix Rodriguez, rhp; x-J.T. Snow, 1b; x-Brett Tomko, rhp. CINCINNATI (5): Barry Larkin, ss; Todd Jones, rhp; Cory Lidle, rhp; Todd Van Poppel, rhp; John Vander Wal, of. FLORIDA (7): Armando Benitez, rhp; Wil Cordero, of; Damion Easley, 2b; Chad Fox, rhp; Lenny Harris, 3b; Mike Mordecai, 2b; Darren Oliver, lhp. MILWAUKEE (2): Dave Burba, rhp; x-Craig Counsell, ss. MONTREAL (3): Orlando Cabrera, ss; Einar Diaz, c; y-Carl Everett, of. PITTSBURGH (4): Kris Benson, rhp; x-Brian Boehringer, rhp; Jose Mesa, rhp; x-Chris Stynes, 3b.

http://www.miami.com/mld/kansascity/sports/8733899.htm Regret festers, even almost three years after the Royals' most ill-fated trade of the last decade. “I wanted to stay here,” Jermaine Dye says. “It was a bad trade,” Allard Baird says. Dye is still playing right field for the A's, producing like he did in 2000, when he hit .321 with 33 home runs and 118 RBIs for Kansas City. 2004: #1 Dye TB 126, 23% more than #2 Hatteburg (103) Note: The A's have a 15 mil option on Dye for 2005. With the recent signings by the A's this year it's doubtful they'll be able to afford that & will likely buy it out for 1.5 mil. Signing Dye as a FA to fill Maggs shoes certainly can't be ruled out. He's 30 as well.

Some more interesting Maggs stats: 2004: Home 922, Away 860 2003: Home 960, Away 895 2002: Home 1033, Away 924 2001: Home 830, Away 1000 2000: Home 1022, Away 813 It would seem to me that his superstar numbers have more to do with where he plays & who's in the lineup than superstar talent. I find it most interesting that in the year of the extension he had only an 830 OPS at home. With such a huge dip it sure is interesting that's the year Thomas went down. Do those numbers spell 75/5? No. Not on this team. Not on most teams. Now do I feel that in 2002 he was a better RF than Sosa? Abosolutely!

The actual RPG value? Yes. It's use as a comparative tool? No. It still remains the number one tool used by fantasy leagues. As for the rest, the A's have discussed a contract extension for Dye. So apparently the fact that he's 33% better than the #2 on the team means something in Moneyball. It's pretty hard to find a player who can separate himself from the rest like that. Just imagine the numbers Dye could put up in the SOX lineup. If you don't think who's hitting before & after you make's a difference .. well

Kenny inherited the problem. Over the last 3 yrs Cameron has a 1427 OPS at the Cell. In 2000 with SEA he had a 5.82 RPG. Koney had a 6.30. In 2001 with SEA he had a 5.91 RPG, Koney had a 6.14. In 2002 with SEA he had a 5.23 RPG, Koney had a 6.31. In 2003 with SEA he had a 5.17 RPG, Koney had a 4.22. Why does this matter? Because Cameron is considered one of the best center fielders in the game today as far as defense is concerned. At the top of the trade he was a solid hitter. Throughout his career with the SOX he has proven time & again he can hit at the Cell. Now what's the value of a CF who has proven himself in your ball park with his bat & can win you many more ball games with his glove? In a pitcher's park you have to consider the value of a player to save runs for a pitcher as well. Hunter & Cameron are probably the best in the game in doing that. Likewise with Cameron soldified in that spot the last 5 yrs there is the dominoe effect on the team in terms of the trades Kenny's made. Koney's a solid hitter, but over the last 4 yrs we would have been far better off with Cameron.

A lie is when a person states something as a fact. I never did that. I stated it as heresay. I then tried to prove it as a fact. I couldn't. So it remains heresay. Now if people want to call that a lie that's their opinion. We all don't have the same level of intelligence or education so I don't expect us all to share the same opinion. Other than making generalizations in direct referenece to your libel of something I said I never misquoted you. Now again if you consider that action a lie read above. If you honestly want to retract your libel statements then YOU should simply go back through the thread & look at every post were YOU dishonestly wrote something in reference to what I said RATHER than simply quote what I said. What you have done repeatedly is worse than what reporters do when they massage quotes to fit the theme of the article they want to write.

That is so obvious. If you play in a hitter's park then the level of skill & talent needed for a hitter to succeed in that park is less than say an average or pitcher's park. Since the skill & talent level needed is less that means there is a greater pool of talent that can succeed in that park. There is statistical evidence to support that. Likewise, the skill & talent level needed for a pitcher to succeed in a hitter's park is much greater than say an average or pitcher's park. Since the skill & talent level needed is more than means there is a smaller pool of talent that can succeed in that park. There is statistical evidence to support this as well. Obviously the smaller the pool of talent you can choose from the higher the price you will pay for that talent.

repeat loop .. libel .. bad assumptions .. mischaracterizations. Don't you get tired of yourself? If you want me to respect what you have to say then try using the quote button without modifying the quote instead of resorting to libelous paraphrasing. As for Maggs I listed my 8 points EXCLUDING the statement I CAN NOT prove. I standby the 8 points.

Other jurors asked about prior offenses, which are often not allowed as evidence, and one wanted to ask a witness if he thought the defendant was guilty. This really is ground-breaking because it's ultimately going to challenge what is & is not admissable as evidence. What the judge allows in this case may establish precedents that greatly reduce lawyers ability to declare evidence inadmissable.

Now of course media influences have nothing to do with this.

As much as I don't like Kerry I equally distain the good news reports. Manufacturing is going to return to the US because automation has become a predominant factor in that industry here. If you consider the highest automated nations of the now G8 the US, Japan, & the UK rank in the top 3. Machines produce a higher level of productivity than cheap/slave labor. The US believe it or not has lower costs involved in skilled workers to supervise & maintain that automation. So productivity gains in this sector in my opinion don't mean nearly as much as job & wage growth. Sprint just announced a cut of 850 jobs in it's IT depts. IT was the biggest wage growth sector in the 90's. I have yet to see one report suggesting an increase in IT jobs, so I doubt very much wage growth is going to occur.