caulfield12

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 01:19 PM) I think the problem is we have created a system which doesn't empower people to get away from it and stand on their own and the key should be finding ways to do that. Part of that is a cultural struggle that we seem to be losing. 50 years ago I think it would be a lot less likely people would look to the government to lend a hand. If they couldn't get anything, okay, help, but as soon as I can find a way to fend on my way, I'll do it on my own. I think we've just created a culture that is more needy as a whole and therefor people have come to expect certain things. I know it gets used a lot but I always find it hilarious that people who are legitimately poor have better phones and far more premium cable channels than I do. The problem is that lots of companies aren't hiring, they're outsourcing, they're sitting on their record profits... So what will stimulate an economic expansion when companies are sitting on their profits, they're not even putting as much into R&D, the Dow's been at an all-time high...nobody is "owed" a job by the government or private industry, but what is your suggestion? If you go back to Ayn Rand's central thesis, it's clearly not government...just that people have to be more creative, more innovative, take more initiative, etc. But that's not going to be possible when 60-65% of Americans can't go to colleges/universities (now more and more often due to affordability issues) and, once again, the Fortune 500 companies aren't going to provide worker training/retraining/skills retooling programs unless they generate profits as well. Some would argue here in China families become more accountable/responsible with/to each other because there's no such thing as God/religion and charities/non-profits aren't trusted, either. As we all know, part of the huge social safety net (in the U.S.) is provided by churches/soup kitchens/shelters and charitable foundations. So wouldn't just as good an argument be that if these programs didn't exist, then nobody could rely upon them...at least not any more than they rely upon government programs? Or that if people didn't believe in God, they would be forced to realize nobody will help them but themselves....another classic Ayn Rand argument, as she wasn't a big believer in religion, either.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 06:43 PM) And the White Sox are not respected because Robin Ventura is their manager? LMAO The Angels ran over us like we were a AAA team this year, and besides Abreu/Sale, we more closely resemble Charlotte than the best team in baseball. Let's put it this way. Other teams, their fans....when someone like Maddon or LaRussa or Scioscia comes to town as an opposing manager, they'll say..."wonder how we're going to get outmanaged or outfoxed in this series?" It doesn't happen as much with baseball as with being outcoached in college basketball (for example, when Pete Carril coached at Princeton, Brad Stevens at Butler, etc.), but managers still have their importance. But I've never in my entire life heard the fan of an opposing team say that about Ventura. Once. Ever.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:36 PM) So you are saying major league teams fear playing teams based on their manager? Respect is a better word, perhaps.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:23 PM) Wow does this sound boring. And yet somehow it's not...it's close to compelling, in a way that sitting through 2 1/2 hours of Transformers 4 is exactly the opposite, both in terms of production budgets/CGI and the experience of feeling "wow, that was actually worth my time." Locke has 132 positive reviews and 17 negs at RT.com http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/locke/#contentReviews Someone else used the word "captivating." Compelling, same difference.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:08 PM) It really is crazy people actually believe everything they don't agree with is all Robin. No one has a say about anything. Robin is clearly running the pitchers into the ground and there is nothing Coop or Hahn or KW or JR can do about it. They are all afraid of big, bad, dumb Robin. They gave him an extension out of fear he may hurt them apparently even though many experts on this board told us Robin doesn't even want to manage. I wish people would once in a while just think about things logically before they come to all of these crazy conclusions. Supposedly Robin's lack of experience was a reason he shouldn't manage, yet all of the inexperienced managers here manage every game perfectly. At a certain point, it doesn't matter...fans buy into the "Robin was just hired to take the heat off KW/JR and they can't blame him too much because, hey, he didn't have any experience so what's the worst that could happen...he's a placeholder like Jerry Manuel or Jeff Torborg to get us to the next manager, etc." The perception around baseball from those announcers for other teams is that the White Sox don't play solid/fundamental baseball, they beat themselves too often with mental and physical errors and that while Ventura is a cool/nice/laid-back guy, he's not a manager they ever fear facing or one that will outmanage their own guy...or that he would be anywhere but in the bottom 5-10 out of 30 MLB managers in their own subjective evaluations. Now that's not to say Terry Francona would have won the division in 2012 or he would have this year's team at .500 or better, but lots of casual White Sox fans do believe managers can make a difference, and they also feel the Sox aren't serious about winning until they invest a lot of money into a proven winner like a Francona or Maddon type. It's why Guillen almost didn't get the job before 2004, with KW preferring Gaston's track record. Another issue is that it's hard to compare Ventura with say, Matheny and Ausmus, because of the talent on the respective rosters. That said, it's now become much more popular for teams to hire managers with little or no experience....all these decisions are giving them cover to do the same thing, instead of going with retread guys who have been recycled over and over again.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:17 PM) You're somewhat getting it now. Interest rates for Japan were elevated in the late 80s and they burst a bubble. That left them with over-capacity in their economy, driving their currency to actually deflate and leaving them with 2 decades of inflation rates below goals. Yes, that is very similar to what happened in the U.S. although the U.S. fought it somewhat harder in 2009 than Japan did. High praise from B, lol.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:11 PM) Looking at the radar for Myrtle Beach...uh, no way they have a game tonight. Good, no more injuries. Someone in the front office should send bodyguards out to protect Davidson and Micah Johnson. And maybe it's better to keep Rodon off a diamond as well this year, haha.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:02 PM) You're crossing up your terms if you think stagflation is what the Japanese have had for the last 20 years. Stagflation is high interest rates combined with high unemployment rates, whereas Japan has had low/zero interest rates for the majority of that time. That setup would be more accurately termed a deflationary spiral or something like that. Thank you for the correction on your interest rate/inflation statement however. I'm sure if you pulled up the interest rates/inflation numbers for Japan from 1983-1993, they'd be elevated. Yes, maybe the terminology is wrong since Japan, with their guaranteed lifetime employment in many sectors, doesn't ever see the high unemployment numbers witnessed in the US or Europe. Whatever the opposite of stagflation is....where you have zero or stagnant growth and the economy essentially running along in neutral without any forward progress...which would describe the US situation as well except for the fact that unemployment/underemployment has spiked higher here than in Japan. The collapse of the housing bubble there had an even more profound impact than our own US crisis...one they have yet to recover from. In recent years, they've taken to quantitative easing, just like the US and some European countries in order to inject more capital into the system to kick-start it somehow. Prices have also risen over the last twenty years there (especially for food and gasoline), but the ability of people to pay for them...their wages...are not increasing enough to keep up with the rate of price increases.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:59 AM) Quote was from 2012 FYI...Just pointing out Coops, who I really think runs the pitching staff, view on pitch counts....That's not his only quote from him on that subject either...Coop gives no (bleep) about pitch counts. Except I'm sure they do think about it when managing Sale...they have no choice with "instant reaction" media that puts Rodon, Japanese hurlers and U.S. high school pitchers in the national headlines instantly after a single start...but they probably think about it less than we do here on the message boards.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:47 AM) Paul Volcker intentionally spiked the interest rates to stamp out inflation. I meant to say HIGH INFLATION under Carter. My mistake. Yes, high interest rates are not always bad, in and of themselves...of course, it's bad if you are buying a car or house or have an ARM, but in general, if there's a sound fiscal policy paired with monetary policy, it can lead to lowered inflation without bringing on STAGFLATION, which is the worst of both worlds, and essentially what the Japanese have been going through for 20 years now after their housing bubble burst. Of course, those fiscal/tax policies, in the form of supply side/Stockman economics have been debunked over and over again by the likes of Krugman and even Gregory Mankiw.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:47 AM) Why? Seriously, you can get a really solid reliever out of a guy who throws 90 from the LH side, throws strikes, and has some sort of off speed pitch. That can give a guy a 10+ year career. Those 2 could make a fairly solid contribution to a much improved bullpen if they are able to do that. Will they? I dunno, but Surkamp has been really good at his role so far. They just don't have that electric stuff. Which means they really have to be command and control guys, like lesser versions of Danks. The margin of error for those kind of pitchers is almost zero. Sure, they can be successful, but the odds of them doing it consistently like a Marte or Thornton for 3-5 consective years are pretty darned low.

QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 10:30 PM) Steve Pearce on the orioles is also having a similar , unexpected year Making Sox killer Nolan Reimold expendable/DFA material.

QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 10:30 PM) Steve Pearce on the orioles is also having a similar , unexpected year Making Sox killer Nolan Reimold expendable.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:34 AM) Yes, this chart is basically the same thing as blaming the economic numbers in the first 2-3 years of the Obama presidency on Bush...just like some will blame them on Reagan. Nevertheless, interest rates were beginning to escalate the last two years under Carter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whip_inflation_now Remember that? It started under Ford, so it was already a growing problem even BEFORE Carter. As far as Reagan being ranked highly, it's just like Truman. Democrats will rate Truman/Kennedy/Clinton/LBJ very highly, Republicans Reagan and Eisenhower. Love him or hate him, and he was intensely polarizing...from the pure perspective of "things accomplished" he and Thatcher had a huge impact that has lasted until today in terms of reversing the government tide and stacking the deck in favor of the rich/elites through fiscal and monetary policies, Supply Side Economics, etc. The Republicans/Greenspan are credited with bringing that inflation number WAY down in the second four years of his presidency...as well as being credited for winning the Cold War and bankrupting the USSR.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:28 AM) I'm guessing this was Hawkins' first concussion. While it's true that only one can mess you up, 99.9% of the time you're fine so long as you let it recover. Morneau had 100 when he was in hockey as a teen. That number isn't exactly, but it's a number that is not in binary code. Knew that Morneau played hockey, just hadn't heard that number before. Guess it didn't affect Tom Glavine as much, or he was simply lucky not to get plunked too often in the head when batting or injured on the basepaths like Morneau.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 10:41 AM) The inauguration freeing of the captives in Iraq did that and Ronny sailed on from there. Weren't interest rates in the 20% range under Reagan or was that the after affect of Carter. I also heard from older folks that Nixon was a great president but was in the shadow of Kennedy and was paranoid as hell which lead to watergate. Iran....Carter was the high interest rates and "national malaise/I sinned in my heart" president. Smart enough to run a nuclear submarine, best "after Presidency," but had no idea how to work with Congress or delegate. Completely ineffective/inept. But it was the inability to resolve the hostage crisis quickly and Americans' overall sense of weakness that pushed Reagan over the top in 1980.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 08:53 AM) Statistically, more people receive government support then any point in time in the countries history. Now I'm not sure if that is adjusted as a % of population so it trends better historically or not but that was a stat I saw about 6-12 months ago in a journal article. And we also have the highest amount of retirees (due to the Baby Boomer generation hitting retirement age within the last five years) at any point in our nation's history. If you strip away retirees and those on disability from that supposed 47%, what are you left with? It's certainly not those on foods stamps/WIC/AFDC/Medicaid because those programs have been cut down in many states almost to zero. Does that also include those, for example, who received the earned income tax credit...working/underemployed poor?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 11:13 AM) I'm trying to figure out if that is a preferred injury or not. Obviously you never want to mess with the brain, but it shouldn't hinder any baseball skills, right? Justin Morneau went from the most feared hitter in the AL to almost out of the game to finally recovering this season in Colorado...but how often do you hear his name referred to like it was 5-7 years ago? Didn't Fernando Vina also have concussions after he got run over by Albert Belle?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 06:53 AM) Yes, we're collecting them. I certainly think of things I got in 2006 and things I got today and call them a collection. I even forgot to add MacDougal's name to the list. Fine, we are amassing/accumulating "high level arms" that have failed to realize their potential. However you want to put it. The main difference is those guys in 2006-07 had a lot better records on the back of their baseball cards before they came to the Sox, except for Masset.

God help us if Surkamp and Snodgress are the two best lefties in the bullpen coming into 2015. JCINAA except in Greg's book.

Chopper, two hopper...should be replaced by the one referring to Matt Abbatacola for any play with a broken bat. So TUC, sorry about the broken/limp/cracked piece of wood, dude. "That's a Matt Abbatacola."

QUOTE (flavum @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 10:27 AM) Myrtle Beach team expects to play tonight. Storm may stay away. Looking forward to seeing Wendelken pitch, and hopefully Hawkins is ok to play. So much for the Hawkins playing idea.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 10:05 AM) Yes Putnam usually throws in the 80's and he's been a great success because of the movement on his pitches. Partly, it's because nearly every MLB bullpen is filled with guys throwing mid 90's and up, so a soft tosser like a Wasserman, Wunsch, Bradford or even Putnam's a total shock even if they do have video and a scouting report.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) If nothing left, then that is Sox fault for not getting more aggressive on other players. I'm not going to give them an excuse for missing the boat. They had a lot of resources for once and should have used them. Talent accumulation is the name of the game and this was a rare instance where the Sox had a large pool and I expect the organization to use that pool. The fact that we signed so few top 30 guys despite having such a large pool is a total disappointment. Where is Marco Paddy's response to what happened? This is his area of expertise. Just to say the Yankees beat everyone by playing with a different set of rules? Well, the Yankees were literally all over the world signing all those guys, Dominicans, Venezuelans, Koreans, etc. Who were the last "young/er" Asian pitchers we signed? There were 1-2 South Koreans I remember who have completely disappeared from the face of the earth.

Leaving Carroll to continue the night before when the lead was finally down to 1 was far worse than leaving Danks in...that totally took the wind out of the comeback sails when the Angels inevitably tacked on another run. Harrelson, Farmer and DJ were all questioning that move before the inning even started and went south. How can the worst pitcher on your big league roster be the best option there?