Balta1701

Time for B.A. to show some Marbles.

31 pitches for Jose through 2. Another 1,2,3 inning in the 2nd.

We've now had what, 4 different 5 run innings this year? Or is it 5? We didn't have any of those last year until the end of June.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 05:26 PM) The years before you mean. We pounded him last year I think. He's been terrible since he got hurt though. I could have swore he shut us down at least 1 or 2 times last year. To the point of getting the usual suspects screaming about corpseball.

This is far more pleasant than many of our outings against (Cy) Mays last year.

Yeah, that's right major league baseball...just go ahead and walk Jim Thome. Paul needs those RBI's to challenge the guys from the east for that fancy trophy he's gonna win.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 05:10 PM) I can't find it on DirecTV either. Try channel 740, that's what it would be if you had the MLB Extra Innings package. The feed from K.C. may be on 648 if you can get that.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 04:39 PM) Make that 4 HRs in 4 ABs. That man is just remarkable. Doesn't that tie the big league record?

Pujols hit his 4th home run in 4 at bats.

So, Contreras had a 1...2...3 first inning, in the bottom half Pods grounded out, Iguchi singled, 1 man on for JT.

QUOTE(Allsox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 02:16 PM) I thought the thinking around here back in spring training was if BA played solid defense and whatever he hit was just a bonus. What happened to that thinking?!? Sure, the kid's struggling with the bat, I expected him to. But he's sure as hell impressed me so far with his glove, his range and his arm in CF. Right now, he doesn't know the difference between fastball/junk but once he does, he'll be alright. We are no longer on pace for a 173-0 season. Someone has to take the blame.

I'm still damn scared of the Twins. They have by far the best pitcher in our division, and they also have a boatload of pitching. Their problem last year, as we all know, was hitting. Thus far this year, Morneau is actually hitting, which would have solved a lot of their problems last year. Add in the return of Torii Hunter and while that offense isn't going to scare you, with their pitching staff it may be enough to give them a shot. Especially once Santana hits his "2nd half form".

QUOTE(JoeBatterz @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) Hippy tree lovers such as Kyyle23, Balta1701 and YASNY will be ordered to make appointments with the Barber before regaining their posting powers. Meanwhile, our folliclely challenged members such as Kid Gleason will be issued Beattle Style Wigs to wear while posting online. Dude, my hair is barely a centimeter long, and I'm probably a couple weeks from cutting it again.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:59 PM) But one definitely could argue that Barry had a responsibility to follow our laws regarding the purchase/use of controlled substances. Ignorance is no excuse. Barry would have to be a complete idiot to NOT KNOW that he was taking some form of steroid, rather than flaxseed oil. I don't believe that he's that stupid. But the key problem is proof. If 5 people go to the police and say that you're using an illegal drug, but the police search your house, person, and all your possessions, and find nothing illegal, and you don't fail any drug tests, is that enough to charge you? Without the hard evidence I don't think they can, but perhaps i'm mistaken.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 12:05 PM) to answer yes or no, you would have to make an unfair and gross generalization of all college atheletes. Whether someone plays an organized sport has absolutely nothing to do with their propensity to commit crimes. Actually, there may very well be a reason why athletetic participation is correlated with crime rate, on either the good side or bad. I don't know the numbers so I'm not going to answer, but think about things like this: For lower crime rates: 1. College athletes probably played sports as middle/high schoolers. Therefore, they weren't on the streets, and therefore could have lower crime rates. 2. College athletes have coaches who watch them more closely than many other university students. For higher ones: 1. Colleges may overlook kids with questionable backgrounds if they possess enough athletic talent 2. College athletes may consider themselves priveledged and take advantage of others. And so on. I'd bet you that if you took "College athletes" as a sample group and compared them with all college students or all Americans of a certain age, there would be a significant difference in the crime rates of the athletes. I have no idea which way, but I wouldn't say they're uncorrelated.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 11:24 AM) I dont see how we could matchup with the Heat at all. We have no answer to Shaq none at all.... and no one can really stop Wade either. If everyone on that team was 100% healthy, I don't think anyone in the league would match up well with them. No team in the big leagues has an answer for a 100% healthy Shaq teamed with Wade. But we haven't seen that all year, as far as I'm concerned.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:56 AM) Not sure of the exact verbage of this amendment, but there is already a standard in place of that nature. Sort of, at least. There is a Unicom air freq (121.5) for air ops, and there is a universal law enforcement cooperative frequency (somewhere in the 140 band I think) which virtually all departments can get to (but not necessarily all handheld radios). EMS and Fire usually have access to that 140 band general freq as well, I believe. In my experience, the problem is often not a matter of standards, but a matter of planning and cooperation. Communications equipment is a key piece of that, but you need local and regional response plans and contact trees that are known and viable across regions. At least it sounds like it wouldn't be dealing with which part of the EM spectrum they can transmit on, it'd be dealing with the equipment they use to access those transmissions. I.e. so that hopefully firefighters wouldn't be rushing up a building that's about to collaps and discovering that their radios don't work.

QUOTE(maggliopipe @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) Really? I don't remember that but we are talking about Dan Pasqua so anything's possible. To hit one of those billboards it would have to be at least 550 feet. Borch's is the longest (504?) and I thought it landed on the concourse. If you angle a shot down the line I think you could clear the concourse without traveling as far as Borchard's. I'm just guessing though.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:27 AM) I have a hard time rationalizing the reward of illegal behavior, basically on the basis of geographic luck. Immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Europe have to go through a rigorous immigration process to become citizens of the US. People from our hemisphere know that they can sneak through our borders and wait long enough for immigration to become a hot button issue, and wait for someone to offer them citizenship the easy way. I think at this point your argument is starting to verge on what I would call "Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good." Yes, it is unfair that people from Africa can't just take a quick walk here and find themselves having a path to citizenship after a decade or so, while maybe someone from Mexico can. However, the fact is that they're already here, in large part because of the fact that the government has refused to figure out any legitimate way to solve the problem, whether it's increasing the legal immigration quotas to fill the employee void we all discuss or penalizing employers who do hire illegals. So, yes, it would be nice if we could just start over at zero cost, send every one of the illegal immigrants back to whatever their country of origin actually was, and then allow a worldwide admission process to fill the spaces we do have open. But at this point, that's just so far from impractical as to be laughable, and in fact, even keeping something like that as an option, no matter how remote, is only delaying actually coming up with a real solution. If we want to do this correctly, in the sense of opening up avenues to the entire world that are actually fair, we're going to have to decide to start doing that right now. There's just no way we're going to be able to conduct a forced mass migration of immigrants out of the U.S. and then allow a return flow of equal or slightly greater size from the entire world. The idea of punishing those who are already here just can't stay on the table if we want to actually come up with good policy. Here would be what I would outline as the tenets of how I would build this sort of policy: 1. Guest worker status for the immigrants who are already here, but with a very long path towards citizenship. 2. A flexible guest worker program for those who are not currently in the country, tied to the demand for those levels of employment. The path to citizenship through this method should be significantly shorter than the path for those who are already here, so as to discourage people from sneaking across and then applying as a guest worker, and to provide some encouragement for people to return home. 3. Strong future punishments for illegal border crossings. This only works, though, if the guest worker program is done correctly, such that the supply is allowed to keep up with demand and not shut off because we get some racist in Congress or the DHS who decides they don't like a certain type of folk. 4. Stronger punishments for businesses who hire illegal immigrants. Fines strong enough to touch the bottom line, i.e. in the hundreds of thousands per worker. Actual enforcement mechanisms, which cannot be negotiated downwards in exchange for campaign contributions (i.e. Walmart).

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:09 AM) Is that a hint of supply side economics I detect in your voice? That answer you quoted, is pretty well taken out of context actually. Tex was referring speficially to farmers and food stuffs industries who are limited by the prices they can receive for their product, which is what I was responding to. If you take one specific industry and effectively say double their wage rate you will get firings/layoffs/increased prices in someway shape or form, or the industry/business will collapse, as profitability is removed as an incentive and the capital investment flees. In a macro view, if people are working they can create more jobs, but the net effect depends on how many other people lose their jobs, lose income from increased prices etc. Especially in an industry that is really sensative to price increases like food stuffs, that industry specifically would suffer in a micro sense. It all depends how those two things would balance out. Well, for that I apologize, I did the best I could given that the quote tags didn't work right & I could barely tell who wrote which part. Maybe I shoulda just kept my mouth shut. And that is a hint of supply side economics, with a strong bit of demand-side economics as well

They're just trying to generate suspense.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:01 AM) A guest worker program is exactly what is needed, except it needs to originate with people applying from outside of the US, and not after committing a crime to get into the US illegally. Aside from the "even though the law is stupid it's the law and they shouldn't violate it" angle, can you offer up any other reasons as to why exactly we shouldn't allow a guest worker program to apply to those who are already here? My counterpoint to that sort of argument would be to say that since there seems to be a real demand for these workers, the problem is not that the people are coming over, the problem is that the government's immigration policy has been out of date for decades, and I find it difficult to justify punishments handed down because people violated an unjust or foolishly designed law.

QUOTE(SnB @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 10:02 AM) flava flav doesn't have a shiny face. However, Pablo Ozuna does wear a clock. It's what got in his way on those fly balls in K.C.

It seems to me like Mays has struggled against every single batter in the White Sox lineup except for Uribe. The lowest average of any of our batters against him (aside from Uribe, who is hitless against Cy Mays) is Konerko's .293. Our lineup's cumulative OPS against Mays is .951, and our batters hit, in total, about .350 against him.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Apr 17, 2006 -> 09:50 AM) And I still would like to see information from a credible source (not a link from a site with an obvious anti-immigration agenda) that states that immigrants are such a burden on the economy. That may be difficult, since I think the evidence currently out there suggests that in almost every way you look at the issue, there is no clear cut answer. Take your pick. Wages, expenditures, jobs, taxes, etc., the evidence doesn't strongly back up either side. Yes, immigration may drive down wages, except in some cases it doesn't. Yes immigrants may take up jobs, but they may also generate some more. And so on.