Soxbadger

What pick you get is determined by the record of the team that signs them. If the pick is top 15 I believe it is protected though. (Edit) Also the free agents are classified as, A, B, C, where A's get first round pick, and so on down. SB

What else can Baltimore do? The AL East leaders are slumping, the Nationals are in 1st, they need to take their chance now. They have tried to buy free agents and that has not worked, they live in the shadow of the Red Sox and Yankees, and if the Nationals start to erode their fan base, 3 years from now they may have no shot at winning. Baltimore is not assured anything, but right now the Al East is as weak as it has been for years, and may be as weak as it will be for years to come. Gotta strike while the iron is hot. SB

Well Gustavo, I do not think the Blue Jays are going to part with him for anything we have to offer. According to the papers, the Marlins have asked for Chacin in return for Burnett and have been denied. So Im not sure who we can offer that will beat Burnett. SB

Chacon is a RH pitcher. So either he messed up both the name and the hand he uses, or he really meant Chacin. SB

I really doubt that the Blue Jays trade Chacin to us so that we can use him as a reliever... But I guess crazier things have happened, I just wont hold my breath. SB

A published village idiot. http://www.anneursu.com/about. She may not like the White Sox, but she can write. SB

Also remember that Illinois is a 2 plate state, and that they will ticket you in Chicago even if you are parked legally. Always fun to find a $50 ticket when you have a fully paid meter. SB

I do not care either way. People are people, there are some diehard fans that annoy me. I hope the bandwagon will buy me a beer if I am cool to them. And these questions are hilarious. I like the team, I do not follow the fans. So I do not care who the fans are because this is the team I like. If other people happen to realize something that I have known my whole life, then good for them. I am not going to get upset with them for admitting I was right. SB

Yeah Walker gets no love this year, but Cooper got no love last year. Its cyclical, and people just need some one to blame. I mean imagine blaming the players instead of the coaches. Its not like either Cooper or Walker play the game. SB

Can I ask how and when do players progress? SB

For some reason I see KW trying to sell teams that Jenks is the cheap closer that they want to trade a good SP for. SB

They just read an email about how many times people on Soxtalk.com voted. Unfortunately Hawk could not seem to get the words Sox and Talk out of his mouth at the same time. Anyways nice work guys. SB

No problem, thanks for running it. And my AIM is Soxbadger so thats easy enough. SB

Qwerty said the rosters would be from 6/29, I assume this is still true? SB

The biggest risks are to the lawyer who brings the cases. If you are censured, or suspended for a year you could potentially lose your entire career. The truth is that is where the penalty should lie. People are not expected to know the law, and because we have an adversarial system, they are in some ways supposed to be opponents. Penalizing a plaintiff is some what unfair, as generally they go to a lawyer for legal advice, and the lawyer is the one who decides whether or not they have a legitimate claim. With out representation, most of these court cases really pose no problems for companies. Pro se litigants are generally uninformed and fall victim to even the most common civil procedure tricks or summary judgement paper work. Pretty much a company will just drown a pro se in paper work to the point that the person has to spend far more time than they have trying to just get the case into court let alone ever having a chance at winning. I just do not think it is fair to penalize the plaintiff for bringing a case that they and a lawyer legitimately think has merit, as it is in the end up to the lawyer to represent the plaintiff or not. Court costs are generally a good punishment because it does not provide a windfall for the defendant (them making money for doing nothing), but at the same time offers the compensation for the amount of time they had to put in. My biggest concern is that who is going to be the judge of what is frivilous? Where do we draw the line? And I am far from an expert, I just happen to have taken some professional responsibility courses. SB

No because there are already plenty of safeguards against frivilous lawsuits, ie lawsuits that have no merit. Just because you are unaware of those measures, does not mean that they do not exist. There is a prescious balance between allowing people to seek justice in court, and penalizing some one for seeking out what they think to be justice. As for this case in America, it would not even get off the ground. Not only iwould the theory be lacking in fundemental areas, I assume they would try mental anguish/ distress, seeing as there are no damages. Damages are necessary in tort cases, and her theory that she is entitled to the cost of the mission does not fall under either nominal, compensatory or punitive, the only damages available to US plaintiffs. Thus her claim is lacking on its face, as she claims no damages, and would be dismissed probably with court costs asserted towards the plaintiff. IE The defendant loses nothing but having to show up in court. SB

Depending on the statutes, many states do allow the defense to ask for attorney fees in connection with frivolous lawsuits. Also, the lawyer may be punished if they are found to be bringing cases with out merit. As for Bush's tort reform etc, There is no amount of laws in the US that can change Russian law. She brought the lawsuit in Russia, therefore US law does not even apply. The case will apply Russian law, as it will be Russian jurisdiction. SB

Clinton was punished, he lost the privilige to practice law for a few years. Lawyers that perjur are subject to discipline, in Illinois it is the ARDC. Not exactly sure where Clinton was practicing or under what rules he was regulated. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/10/01/scotus.clinton/ As for Rove Id expect the same thing over the lieing under oath, very little. The difference is, that what he lied about may actually be a crime which he can be convicted of. Where as fornication in the oval office is not illegal, therefore his perjury was the entire scope of the illegality pretty much. SB

My guess is that they know Buerhle will throw a lot of early strikes so they are told to try and get hits early in the count. Buerhle on the other hand is told that the A's are going to wait for pitches so he tries to throw early strikes. ::shrugs:: There are a million explanations for why something happens in baseball, some of them are important, some of them just fog the truth. Its not like a science experminent where you control a, b, and have only variable c. Every single part of the equation is a variable, therefore you just have to try and go by your best guess. SB

Against the A's you would want control pitchers over "stuff" pitchers because they will wait out stuff. The A's are more likely to hammer Contreras than Buerhle because the A's are taught to take pitches and get ahead of the count. When you are ahead of the count, control is much more important than stuff because most MLB can hit a 100mph fastball if that is what they are looking for. They are not going to swing 2-0 at a fastball on the corner, or any other pitch with great location. They will swing at something that gets the middle of the plate. SB

Reading these threads are so frustrating. The Sox have won different ways each game, so what if they rely on the home run for a week or so, they won with out it for a number of weeks too. As for being no hit the first 4, that means nothing. Im sorry but if you watch enough games you will see many pitchers start off strong and fade, very few start off bad and then get stronger as the game goes on. Add to that the hitters have seen the pitcher 1-2 times, and it is no wonder why a team is more likely to score runs in the 4,5,6 innings. I just wonder why people are unhappy winning. Last I checked there is no, we were up for 4 innings rule. Its who is ahead at the end of the 9th that matters. SB

No The robots were made by the aliens, which appear in the second movie. The first movie is entirely comprised of historical figures, the second movie is comprised mostly of people from the future. SB

Beane has said there is no way he is trading Zito, whether it is smoke or not, but that does not suggest hes going a different way. As for the Giants, why do they want Everett? They already have enough old players in the outfield, what will Everett do for them? After the disaster trade with the Cubs, they probably want pitching prospects. If we take all of Schmidt's salary, we may be able to get him with a few middle to high prospects. If we want them to take on salary, we will probably have to give up top tier talent. SB

I often send out less than good trades to start because I want to see what teams are interested in what. I take my trades usually as an invitation to deal. IE my last round in a league I sent out trades either with Vernon Wells or Pat Burrel for starting pitcher. Every one of those trades I sent I would of considered a win if it was accepted, many get rejected but if some one reoffers a trade, then I start to look for what they want etc to try and get the edge. You do not know what some one will do unless you try. SB

If I was a homer I would of said that purely on talent they would win the Big 10. Being realistic I said that it is their schedule that will give them the best chance. I do not really think there is much concern about the OL, as they have Raiola and Thomas returning, plus they always have outstanding lineman waiting in the wings. The DL should be good, Beckum will probably redshirt, and the reality is only Erasmus James was that dominant last year, and hopefully Cooper can come in and fill that role. LB's should only get better as they will have another year under their belt. The biggest concern is going to be DB's, but outside of Stark and Leanord, our DB's were terrible last year. Also PK will be a woe as usual. Stocco is not great, but he is not that bad either. His job is to take care of the ball, if he can lower his turnover's he will be a very effective starter. Another concern will be whether or not Calhoun can carry the load, and whether Walker can be an effective back up if Stanley is gone for the year. SB