Balta1701

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 01:50 PM) Well, I think this is actually a good thing, in terms of achieving the goals we now have set for Iraq. I think any troop reduction would be a mistake. But that said, one danger lurking on the horizon is that we cannot just keep sending the same troops over and over again, and keep implementing these stop-loss programs. After a while, that system will break down. And with the poor recruiting levels the military is seeing despite all sorts of incentives, the inflow won't be enough. Then it will be time to start discussing the "D" word. The only reason not to start talking about it now, except of course for those all-important elections...is if you think that an additional 15,000 troops (an increase of about 12%) will somehow stem the massive increase in violence we've seen this year. If you don't believe that, which I don't one bit...then it's time to ask the question; more or less. If more, where are they coming from, if less, how are we going to manage the disaster we've created?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 01:50 PM) When there aren't 1,000 applicants for 150 jobs, then Walmart will have to raise wages to attract the candidates they need. But I thought unemployment was at historic lows and the economy was rolling along great?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 01:38 PM) On Lugo: No thanks, he's going to pick up a contract this offseason that he is not deserving of, he'd be an ok leadoff man but he'd also play atrocious defense. Lugo has also been inconsistent this season on almost a Podsednik level. In 39 games with the Dogers this season, this is the line he's put up: .225 .291 .275, 0 hr, 5/9 SB. That puts him at 23/32 on the season in stolen bases, which isn't very good either. Here is his batting average/OPS by month this season: .245/.621 .349/1.043 .313/.899 .235/.615 .205/.456. (He had 2 at bats in April, so I left that month off.) Yes, he had 2 dynamite months, but he sandwiched those in-between 2 months that were pretty darn bad, and is finishing off with a month worse than Podsednik.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 01:08 PM) We have a bargain top player at a skill position, that is worth more than we would get for him. A better option is trading Fields, or converting him. Crede is better at that position than Josh will ever be, and better than most MLB 3B will be. I agree that Crede is better at that position than Fields will ever be, but that's not entirely the issue that should determine whether a person is traded. The question is...iif you compare a minimum $5 million or so for Crede next year, and $8 million or more the next year, combined with a potential for Crede to walk after 2008, to a $400k Josh Fields and whatever you could get for Crede, which one comes out as better for the team both in 2007 and long term? I honestly don't have the answer to that unless I know what teams might offer for Crede. But if someone offered me enough for Crede, the Josh Fields option could have its advantages. That all depends of course on what someone is willing to offer. If the offers are Chone Figgins, I laugh and try to sign Crede for a few more years. If the offers are Brandon Wood or Matt Cain or something like that...my ears would perk up.

Link.

QUOTE(SinkingShip06 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) I disagree. this team has gotten a s***LOAD of breaks this year. the difference is that they have not capitalized on them. GIDP. that's what they do. we need bullpen help. we need a new SS, LF, CF, leadoff man, manager, 3rd base coach, hitting coach, so um yeah. not much to change is there? We do not need a new CF. We need Ozzie to actually play our current CF.

QUOTE(SinkingShip06 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 12:38 PM) you have to trade from a position of strength. that means starters and outfield guys. While 3rd base is not as strong as our starting staff, in that we have McCarthy, we also do have a guy at 3rd base who has already spent a year at AAA in Josh Fields. He's not going to give us near what Crede would give us, but Josh Fields + whatever we get for Crede could well be significantly better than Joe Crede + Fields in the minors. I'm not talking about any of these guys as a salary dump. But these guys have a metric ton of trade value, and if KW gets the right offer, he has to be open to it.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 12:29 PM) Joe is one of the top 3B in the entire MLB, why would we get rid of something like that? Because you can get some of the top guys in all of MLB at other positions...and save yourself like $8 million a year in the process, by trading him...if the right deal comes along.

Joshua Fields Forever...

QUOTE(SnB @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 12:12 PM) Balta, I see your point, but you have to also think that next year is possibly the best chance we're going to have at another championship for awhile. I'm all for going all out for next year and seeing where that takes us. You can only plan for the future so much, when the opportunity is there, which it will be next year, you gotta take advantage of it. On that point I agree, but I will say this; it's not worth sacrificing the next 8 years to win next year. In other words, if we want to win next year, we should be smart about it. It is terrible strategy to just allow free agents at the level of Mark Buehrle and Freddy Garcia and Jermaine Dye walk in exchange for draft picks. If 1 or 2 of those 4 end up walking for draft picks, that's tolerable. Not ideal, but tolerable. But we simply can't afford to have 3 or 4 of them walk and just wind up loaded on 2nd round draft picks. Not with the talent they have. If Mark Buehrle can not be resigned, he can not be with this team on opening day next year. Whether you think this season is an abberation or is the norm for Buehrle from now on only affects how much you offer him for an extension IMO. He is a guy who was in the top 10 pitchers in the big leagues for 3-4 years, and is coming off of 1 down year. He can bring you a King's ransom right now on the trading block, which compared with a couple of draft picks is huge. I personally would prefer to resign Mark if he can be had for about $12 m a season or under, because I think this year is just an off year and he'll be back on top next year. If you disagree with me that's fine. But either way, he can not be allowed to enter next season on the White Sox without a contract extension. Garcia and Dye are at another level...where because of their age and their performance in 06, I'd be willing to accept them possibly staying if the right deal does not come along, and only being lost for draft picks. But if the right deal comes along, you have to be open to selling them, to simply make the team better. If we could load up on young pitching and young talent by trading all 4 of those guys, if none of them can be extended, I would not be opposed. We would be better in 2008 on having traded all of them for the right talent than we would if we let them all walk, and as the Marlins and a few others have shown, if we get the right talent back for them, we might be better in 07 too.

So, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's followed the case of Maher Arar, the Canadian citizen who was grabbed by U.S. authorities at an airport in 2002, held without charges, and shipped to Syria to be tortured as an ally of terrorists. So, the Canadian government conducted an investigation into whether any charges or holding of him was appropriate, and here are the results. So, based on an unconfirmed report that didn't even come from our own intelligence serivices, the U.S. used a "rendition" to send a man abroad for beatings and torture of all sorts. Clearly, the President needs more of this power, otherwise, there may still be innocent people who aren't tortured.

QUOTE(SnB @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 11:42 AM) this team will be right back in it with a few additions in the offseason.......and when I few, I mean "few". Alot of our guys underachieved last year, I don't think that'll again next year. Improve our LF situation, maybe our SS situation, and stock up on some relievers and we're a favorite next year again. Blow up the team, gimme a break. Ok, here is the other side of that token. At the end of 2007, these guys are Free Agents (barring contract extensions): Mark Buehrle Jermaine Dye Freddy Garcia Tadahito Iguchi At the end of 2008, these guys are Free Agents: Jim Thome Javier Vazquez (I think) Joe Crede Juan Uribe ($5 m option for this year, $500,000 buyout if not) Jon Garland Mike Macdougal In other words, within 2 years, a lot of the guys on this team are going to need to be extended or moved, including 4/5 of our starting pitching staff. That is a lot of holes to fill. We have 4 guys who are free agents at the end of next season. If we can not sign them, we may put ourselves in a significantly better situation for the long term by moving them this offseason and stockpiling talent, especially if we can get young pitching back for them. I'm not sure if I'm in favor of a complete blow up. But if the right deals are offered, I would not be opposed to it. But that is only if the right deals are offered...think about us picking up the talent the Marlins were able to stockpile from a few big deals, but also having $100 million to spend. That would be one hell of a team for 5-6 years. I will say this...because of the contract situation, unless we only are offered garbage back, Freddy Garcia should be moved this offseason, because he will almost certianly bring back a higher price than the draft picks we'd get when he leaves. But more importantly, either Mark Buehrle must be resigned this offseason to an extension, or he must be traded. Mark Buehrle is the most valuable trading chip on this team to almost every team in baseball. Right now, he could fetch a price much, much more valuable than the draft picks we would get if he left. Top of the league talent, maybe even multiple players at the top of the league. This team will be sabotaging the next 5 years if he goes into next season with the White Sox and no extension. If you don't think he'll ever return to the 2005 form, then you must trade him before the winter is up.

Keep that trade value Risin' Freddo.

Hey, KFan. I gots just one thing to say to yous... Talk to me when you guys actually make the series.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 06:24 AM) Well sure enough, as a follow up to this, Bush got the bump he was looking for when he started in with this stuff. He got a few of the core GOPers behind him again. Not much movement outside the GOP, though - I think he was trying to grab back some Indies, but failed. So now, of course, the bump will fade. Its just a questions of how much it will fade between now and the November midterms. I think maybe Bush did this stuff a bit too early, unless he has some other tricks up his sleeve (which Rove... I mean Bush... might). Last check on Rasmussen showed their projections in the Senate at 49 R to 48 D with 3 tossups (Jeffords is counted as D). I think its going to be close. Rassmussen has been running a daily tracking poll on Mr. Bush's approval ratings for quite some time. Here's what they saw last weekend, going along with his big 9/11 anniversary push. Bush Job Approval Sept 2005 - Current Approve Disapprove Sep 19 40 58 Sep 18 41 58 Sep 17 41 57 Sep 16 44 54 Sep 15 45 53 Sep 14 47 50 Sep 13 45 52 Sep 12 44 54 Sep 11 41 57 Sep 10 42 56 Sep 9 42 56 This is from that article with the Gallup poll: 44 would be right in line with what Rasmussen was seeing, and Ras already has the post-911 bounce fading. It's still going to be a close-run election...and the media is going to do all they can, as they always do, to spin this as "Bush's big bounce is finally here", but in the daily tracking polls, it's already fading. Other stuff: CONNECTICUT (Governor, Senate) Rasmussen Senate | governor. 9/13-14. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (8/21 results) Senate Lieberman (CfL) 45 (45) Lamont (D) 43 (43) Schlesinger ® 5 (6) TEXAS (Governor) SurveyUSA. 9/16-18. Likely voters. MoE 4.3 (6/23-25 results) Perry ® 35 (35) Bell (D) 23 (20) Strayhorn (I) 15 (19) Friedman (I) 23 (21) Warner (L) 2 RHODE ISLAND (Governor, Senate) Brown University. 9/16-18. Likely voters. MoE 4% (6/24-26 results) Senate Chafee ® 39 (37) Whitehouse (D) 40 (38)

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 05:18 AM) Interesting for me is it looks like there was a solid bipartisian effort to push this through, and a solid bipartisian effort to kill it. http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/c...techtopheds-hed And even more interestingly, there was a bipartisan movement on both the left and right sides of the Blogosphere to find out who was trying to stop that Bill in the Senate by putting "Secret Holds" on the bill (turned out to be Byrd and Stevens, who both dropped their holds once they were exposed.)

Thank God...the teams with the most money are back in the playoffs. Just as God intended.

So, I was watching BMac pitch last night both in the 8th and in the 9th innings, and think I saw a few noteworthy things. First and foremost, BMac destroyed people in the 8th inning with his changeup. It was working like dynamite, and they went 123. In the 9th inning, his changeup wasn't nearly as sharp. But I don't think that was totally what killed him in the 9th. I think what killed him in the 9th was that something has happened to his curve ball. Whether or not the curve was the pitch people were hitting isn't the point, the more pitches he has to choose from that are working the harder it is for people to hit him. Last year, BMac was tossing up there a big sweeping curve ball...the kind that starts off aiming at a right handed batter and breaks hard to wind up on the outside corner. It was Zito-like, except from the other side. This year, BMac's curve ball is much, much tighter. It starts off in the zone instead of aiming at the batter, has some break to it, but not nearly as much. It looks a lot like Javier Vazquez's current curve ball, and it winds up hanging a lot. I'm not sure what did this, if Cooper made some change, if it's just not being able to pitch enough, or if he's still hurting from whatever that was that sidelined him for 2 weeks back in August. But that just isnt' the same pitch he was throwing at any point last season.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 19, 2006 -> 11:05 AM) Those numbers are very similar to what Joe Crede, Juan Uribe, and Carl Everett had LAST YEAR (and none of them started as bad as BA). Would somebody tell Ozzie that. If we told Ozzie that...we'd wind up with Carl Everett in CF instead of Mackowiak.

If someone pays the appropriate price for him, yes. The appropriate price being roughly what teams were offering Baltimore for Tejada earlier this year. Maybe more. I.e. a Brandon Wood, etc. Top 10 in baseball prospect plus some throw ins.

Little bit of fun here. Brian Anderson hit .161 in April, .167 in may, and .191 in June. Post All Star, he has hit .285. In the 2nd half, Rob Mackowiak has 80 at bats. He has hit .250 in those at bats, almost Podsednik territory. Just for fun, I figured I would like to know what would have happened had Ozzie shut up and Played Anderson almost every game in CF after the break except for the occasional day off or late inning pinch hit situation. So if I were to give Anderson another 80 at bats in the 2nd half...if his 2nd half numbers were to go unchanged (and not improve with even more experience), here would be his season line: .245 batting average, .300 OBP. Considering how bad he started off, that wouldn't be a bad season at all.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 05:52 PM) We have 4 automatic outs right now at the bottom of this lineup. So, you'd advise dumping Crede, Pierzynski, and Anderson?

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) What a shocker...one time thru the order, and no hits. At least we got 2 walks. Take that, Mr. Pessimism!

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 05:47 PM) I'd rather be listening to Weiner and the Butt on 97.1 than this game. Peter, if you watch this game, you die.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 05:44 PM) I have tickets tomorrow, but I really don't want to see this s*** in person. Why pay for parking at a hot dog when my empty seat speaks for itself. Get some ballpark food and think about those of us who are stuck with Dodger dogs.