jackie hayes

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 02:24 PM) nice Seinfeld Reference. Lol, sort of -- I often saw the ads before the Seinfeld episode, though.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 02:22 PM) The Widge is due. Everybody beats him.

"where Rogers clearly deserved better" -- boo f'n hoo

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 01:49 PM) What does a business do when the amount isn't in nickels? New rounding rules? Something has to change. Or, if they change everything to increment in nickels, that is also a change. For a large business, like say a Walmart, that is a HUGE change to have to make. Cash registers, software, training, etc. I'm just skeptical about this. Why would Walmart's problem be any different than a scaled-up version of what many mom-and-pop stores face? There are a bunch I know of who've chosen on their own to eliminate nickels. If the costs are so great, why would they choose to make the switch?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 01:34 PM) Except there won't be a $40M savings, as discussed earlier. The cost to business of the changes necessary will far outweigh that. My question is more to that point -- why will those changes be necessary?

QUOTE(infohawk @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 01:22 PM) I say the bullpen is doing well because their peripherals are good and they aren't giving up lots of hits, luck or no luck. It's just a fact. If the bullpen were to regress by giving up lots of hits despite good peripherals, I would have to say that they weren't doing well despite the fact that they might still be pitching well. It's ultimately about aligning performance with results. The only point of my post is that the struggling starters haven't become "bad" as much as they have perhaps been a little unlucky and that our oft-criticized pen is getting pretty good results from their performances. On the peripherals (by which I take it you mean k rates? that's the only thing I noticed mentioned explicitly), okay. But the babip numbers you quote suggests that the relievers have been getting very lucky, too. Except for Javy, there's not much bad luck in the rotation's babip numbers. A .295 babip is just barely above the league average, the difference is too small to lead to these results. They have been most definitely been pitching badly.

Humor me. Suppose the only thing that changes is the fact that there are no pennies available. Non-cash transactions still use/transfer cents. Only when hard cash changes hands are businesses forced to choose between this nickel and the next. What's the difference? We already have transactions in fractions of a penny (the most common one, gas is $3.079, not $3.07, as everyone knows). Now we do it in fractions of a nickel. What's the big deal? Not that it's such a big deal, but then, when Congress is cheaping the Census about $58 mil on their budget, $40 mil starts to seem important. (Of course, it would be better to roll back the tax cuts, but that's another thread, and this is just a needling cheap shot...)

QUOTE(infohawk @ Jul 20, 2006 -> 12:15 PM) I have a fairly strong interest in sabremetrics, although I'm not entirely a devotee to the religion. I do think it is a very useful tool when evaluating talent and team composition. One thing I noticed about not only Javy but also some of our other starters is that their BABIP (used to determine a pitcher's relative "luck" on balls hit into play) are higher than the league average. The theory is that when a batter hits a ball into play that is not a homerun (which is blamed on the pitcher), neither the batter nor pitcher can control what happens. An eighth of an inch can be the difference between a two-run single or an infield pop-up. The league average BABIP is .290, in other words, this is the typical batting average against a pitcher for all balls hit into play other than homers. Here are our starters BABIPs: Buerhle .296 Contreras .270 Garland .303 Garcia .295 Vazquez .321 Only Contreras has a BABIP below the league average of .290. Garland's is high (but I believe has been declining, perhaps accounting for his improvement) and Vazquez's is really high. The thinking is that a pitcher's BABIP will move toward the .290 point of equilibrium throughout a season. The sabremetric guys always argue that the peripheral numbers are a true indicator of how well a pitcher is pitching -- particularly strikeouts, walks and homers. If those numbers are pretty good, than a pitcher with a high BABIP is a strong candidate for improvement going forward. Likewise, a pitcher with an unusually low BABIP is a strong candidate for regression (with or without good peripheral stats). FYI -- here are the Tiger's BABIP numbers: Robertson .287 Verlander .259 Rogers .273 Bonderman .293 In summation, we have more guys with room for improvement and the Tiger's have more guys with room for regression. This doesn't guarantee that it will happen, but it is likely. Another interesting little stat. Take a look at Bobby Jenks BABIP: Jenks .307 It's high, but his peripherals are so good that the opposing hitters just don't hit that many balls into play against him. Here's the rest of the Sox bullpen: Thornton .256 (Good peripherals) Cotts .243 (Good peripherals) McCarthy .255 (Good peripherals) and... Politte .349 (Yikes! And terrible peripherals with 30 innings pitched with just as many strikeouts as walks at 15 each) In other words, lots of free passes not negated by strikeouts and lots of hits. Overall, the bullpen is doing pretty well and the starters have been a bit unlucky, which wasn't the case last year. One thing I have noticed is that the starters have been giving up the long ball a bit too much, particularly Garland and Garcia. Interestingly, Vazquez has really good peripheral stats and is tied with Contreras for the least homers given up by the starters at 11. This could suggest that he is partially the victim of bad luck (although I'd like to see him ditch that curveball). When you think about luck, think about that ducksnort that was hit into shallow center during the sixth inning and, in the same inning, the seeing-eye single by Maggs that would have been a double-play ball had it been a few more feet to the right or left. The Grand Slam was all on Vazquez, though. Just a little above or below .290 does not mean much. Among the starters, I think Vazquez and Verlander (each 30 points off the mean) are the only notable ones -- not big surprises, imo. But it's odd to say "the bullpen is doing pretty well and the starters have been a bit unlucky". If you believe in babip regression-to-the-mean, the bullpen isn't doing well, they're getting lucky. It's either luck or performance, it can't be whichever one makes our players look better. If our starters are unlucky, then our pen is damn lucky. (And the k rate doesn't affect babip, so it wouldn't change that conclusion.)

Lol, it would be hard to have a thread with less sabrmetric analysis. So funny how these threads go.

Supposedly he was also b****ing about not being in the lineup. Then he refused to sit in the dugout. He claims Gibbons berated him in front of the whole team, though Ricciardi says, "His version of events are different from ours." So disappointed in the Washington Post. Sic, sic, sic. Anyway, the story.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 11:51 PM) I started off with a Citibank regular mastercard when I started college, they started me on the "it expires every year" program at first. Usually I'd get mine a few weeks before it expired when I was still new. After a few years they started pushing the dates back, I've had it for something like 7-8 years now, and this one doesn't expire until 08. Umm, okay...

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 11:31 PM) I have the same Card. Citibank Diamond Preferred Rewards card. When I signed up, I got an introductory offer of 10,000 points, which = a clean $100 for signing up, on top of those rebates you mention. They will try to offer you those credit protector programs though...every card I've used has tried to offer me them (hmm, you think they're making some money on those?) No kidding? Small world. My number's 55555555555. What's yours? The only problem with it is how soon it expires. Mine's done next month and I'm still waiting on the new card. When does yours expire?

Depends what you use it for. I use the Citibank card with 5% back on gas + groceries, 1% on everything else, which is a great deal for me. I don't think there are any introductory offers, though. (Maybe an APR thing, they all offer that, but that wouldn't really help you.)

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 11:03 PM) I'm not talking about a "take a penny leave a penny" jar. I'm talking about the things say at McDonalds, the small slots that are in front of cash registers, where people only leave pennies, not take them. You'd quite literally be putting the Ronald McDonald House out of business. The Salvation army bell ringers would take a huge hit also. People give them pennies because they don't want them piling up. I don't think he was connecting the two. I believe the g-a-p-t-a-p thing was just a separate personal annoyance. I don't know -- you're saying people, when they see the charity jar, say, 'These pennies, but no more!' Santo's saying they'd just leave a nickel. I tend to agree with santo -- I think people decide to ease their guilt a tad, then leave the most worthless thing they have. There's a quick, easy paper in that.

Britt Burns -- my first Sox baseball card. Good times, good times.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 10:45 PM) He's definately part of the problem but I'm more or less talking about what needs to be fixed. IMO if there's a pitcher on this team whom you should have faith in through his struggles it's Buehrle. I never say this ever but it's ok with him I think, everything is going to be alright with Mark. Ick, I feel dirty. If we're going to fix the spiff starting pitching Vazquez and/or Garcia need to be replaced, that's basically what i'm getting at. Agreed, just saying he's part of the immediate problem. Well, agreed so long as nothing's truly wrong. I'm really hoping it's just tipping pitches.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 10:26 PM) At this point in time I think you can narrow down the starting pitching woes to 2 men, Javy and Freddy. Both have 1 major flaw that is the biggest factor in their suckiness. Freddy has his pathetic fastball and no out pitch and Javy has his embarrassing lack of mental fortitude. I really don't know the solution to this, if I had to do something I'd keep Javy simply because he's atleast shown flashes this year and still has his stuff. Freddy on the other hand, I have no use for anymore his lack of velocity has yet to be addressed by anyone within the organization and it pisses me off. I don't know how you could exclude Mark from our sp woes. Not that it'll go on forever, but right now he's been the worst.

I don't think it makes the trade look any different. Lopez has pitched well for them. I don't think the Sawks ever thought he was better than Riske, they just needed a lefty. Really a win-win, no surprises type of trade.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jul 18, 2006 -> 09:47 PM) Well, it's not like it's normal. Random fact: Babe Ruth stole home 10 times in his career. No, just saying. It's not so rare that you say it can't be done. Oakland did it yesterday.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ Jul 18, 2006 -> 07:07 PM) You can't steal home. Uhh...

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 11:44 PM) As others have suggested, I'd go used. Buy a quality car about 3-4 yrs old with reasonable mileage (not over 50k). You can get more car for your money and if you buy a reliable car, repairs much of an issue. You can also negotiate an extended warranty (I know the naysayers say they aren't a great "deal") to 100k miles. That can give you a bit more peace of mind. In 2001, I bought a 1998 Lexus ES300 for less than what my girlfriend paid for a 2001 Accord LX. Be patient and shop around. Find a local used car deal that specializes in nice used cars. You can probably find some that sell at or near wholesale. Places like Carmax are good for those that don't like to haggle and do a lot of research. They back the cars they sell and offer a reasonable price. But with a little work, better prices can be had. Sometimes much better prices. Sites like the aforementioned edmunds.com and also kbb.com (Kelly Blue Book) can be very helpful. The best advice I can give is: 1. Have a game plan before you ever talk to a sales person. If you want to just browse, do just that and don't fall into letting the sales person lead you. Give them little or no info at first. 2. Never tell them how much of a monthly payment you can afford. My first car (I call my idiot purchase), I bought a new Accord and told them I could afford $300 a month. I didn't pay attention to the other "numbers". After I signed the papers and took delivery, I found that they financed me at a high interest rate for 66 months, not 60 to get the payment to $306. Fortunately, with a little guidance, I realized my mistake and refinance at the local credit union less than a week later, for 60 months and about 2-3% less on the interest rate. Always focus on getting the best purchase price you can, not the rate or the payment. 3. Do not be afraid to walk away. Never buy into the pitch that "this offer is good today only". That's horses***. If a dealer wants to sell a car, you can negotiate the right price anytime as long as he has the inventory. 4. Go to multiple dealerships to get a feel for how they treat you. 5. Be patient and don't feel like you have to jump into anything. Before you make a final decision, run the numbers buy someone you know that has experience in buying cars. It never hurts to get a 2nd opinion. It will make you feel more at ease once the purchase is complete. 6. Be patient. I think I mentioned that, didn't I? ALL that. That's all great advice. Let me add a small thing; don't sign ANYTHING until you're buying the damn car. I had a dealer ask me to sign something as soon as I walked in. He told me, Oh, it's just something saying that you will buy today if the offer is good enough, so that he 'could get me the best deal'. I told him that was one of the stupidest things I'd heard in my life. And as I tried to read it, he kept trying to get me to sign it quickly. At that point, I knew there was not a chance in hell I'd ever buy from him. The point is simply, they aren't all so bad, but there are some as awful as anything you've heard. Don't trust them at all, and be combative.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 11:33 PM) Would any one rather try to move Freddy for young SP Prospects and then combine them with Fields in an attempt to get Crawford? That is all I really care to keep Fields around for. To try and get one of these young stars who may become available such as Crawford or MCab. If you're gonna edit this post, take out Cabrera. No WAY he's moved.

QUOTE(SadChiSoxFanOptimist @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 11:08 PM) I completely agree. The game I watched Linebrink against Atlanta, Cameron just OWNED center field. He moves like a gazelle with a rocket pack...

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 10:53 PM) Third, whether Fields ever plays for us, he appears at this point to be very likely to become an above-average major league positional player, and has some small chance of being a star. I just think those guys are worth more than 30-year-old set up men -- even good 30-year-old set up men. Ehh...a good chance, okay. But not "very likely". We're still talking about half a season here, in the minors. Don't oversell it.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 10:52 PM) He is pretty young. Would I really feel great trading him for a reliever? Considering the hot/cold tendencies of a reliever (polite, shingo, foulke, koch, etc, etc) I would think you could get better value from our top prospect. And believe me, he is our top prospect. Well said. Honest question -- we've traded better prospects for sp and Jim Thome. Have we traded as good a prospect for a rp?