Balta1701

QUOTE(ChiSoxFan @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 08:01 PM) Jose......... Getting it done again. Jose Contreras went out there tonight with absolute junk. Nothing was working. People were hitting him. He was walking people. Falling behind some guys. Lots of men on base. And that is one ROUND number he put on the board. Guess who that performance reminded me of? Jose, meet Black Jack. Black Jack...meet Jose. That was a Black Jack-Cy Young season worthy version of pitching with absolutely nothing. Wow. Great work Jose. And oh yeah...Paulie "4 home runs in 4 games" Konerko... Dustin "Mike Sweeney is nothing compared to me" Hermanson? . Man, I thought we were doomed there. I really did. 15. Hi St. Louis...WE CAUGHT YOU AGAIN!!!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 05:44 PM) Well...Willie up with a RISP...last time he was in the big leagues, this didn't work out too well...let's change things willie... Nope...flied out before my post even came up.

Well...Willie up with a RISP...last time he was in the big leagues, this didn't work out too well...let's change things willie...

Wood threw more pitches in inning 1 than Contreras threw in innings 1 and 2 combined. Any time Jose has 10 pitch innings or so...even if he gives up a hit or two, that's a good sign for him.

By the way...Published reports today tell us that one Giants player Bonds got into a fight with earlier this season was pitcher Jason Christiansen. Blows were reportedly landed on him by Bonds. How far am I allowed to go in insulting Bonds without it becoming a personal attack? Can I use the phrase "Roid Rage"?

Well, we didn't put anything on the board, but if nothing else, that was a 30 pitch first inning for Brown. I love it when our hitters use a little bit of patience.

None in 6 years...guess we're overdue for one.

Hmph...I just noticed this... We have Bill Welke and Tim Welke as umps this series...are those 2 brothers?

Wood has now thrown as many pitches as Contreras threw in inning 1.

Yes, that's right kiddies, here it is just for you...the Fema for kids RAP! (let me know if someone else posted that somewhere else in these 40 pages)

QUOTE(qwerty @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 05:18 PM) I thought you had mlb.tv... or is that someone else? I only have the audio...have the direcTV package at home but I'm sitting here in office catching up on Nature papers that I missed during my 2 weeks away...I haven't loaded the audio because I'm about to head home.

Um, did that inning end? Gameday hasn't updated the last pitch.

QUOTE(Colorado Sox Fan @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:50 PM) Give him a start this weekend. Ok, so here's the question...do you want to go with the 6 man rotation, give BMac the starts, and potentially cost Mark/Jon 1 start a piece and a win that could make the difference in the Cy Young race, or do you go with the 5 man rotation and try to give those 2 the best shot you can? Personally...I plan for the playoffs at all costs, and go with the 6 man as long as Brandon can take it.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:49 PM) Mlb.com has all the elimination numbers in their standings section, so you can always look there for future reference. You're kidding...that's great...finally don't have to calculate them any more when I take 2 week trips and have internet access in random hotel corners while drunk off my ass!

QUOTE(Ozzie Montana @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:47 PM) I agree. I didnt see him missing the rest of the season either maybe a few days but that's it. Also, OFFTOPIC Morse from the Mariners and the guy we included in the trade with Seattle has been suspended for steroid use. Already a thread on this over in ATH.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:40 PM) Am I the only one that sees Rowand as a possible god in the postseason. I just see him stepping up and playing out of his mind in the playoffs, with his bat, glove and baserunning. He's our most clutch player right now (great RISP #s) and I just see him as being a big game player, hell he's hit 3 of his 12 HRs against the Red Sox this season. If Mark Lemke can turn himself into a postseason God...anyone can do it. I have no idea who will turn out to be the hero for this team...I just want there to be a few.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:36 PM) I bet money they try to add a cutter in the offseason. Its the Sox MO. I think we were actually talking about this in a thread about a month ago when Brandon finally started getting his act together at AAA...they were talking about how there were plans to work on a new pitch with him in the offseason, but if my memory serves it actually wasn't a cutter, which was surprising to me because as you say it is their MO. Even if it were I wouldn't complain...it worked pretty well for Loaiza when he found one.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:35 PM) I just don't think Rowand is popular enough to win one yet. Vernon Wells and Ichiro will likely win GGs this year, I just don't see Rowand getting the necessary National Attention, even with his unbelievable Yankee series. The 3rd GG could go to Kotsay, who sadly, is more nationally well known than Row. When does the voting happen in relation to the playoffs? (Seriously...even if guys aren't supposed to vote based on the playoffs, ARow out there playing vacuum cleaner in CF for a few games is probably enough to put him in people's minds)

QUOTE(Felix @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:30 PM) Says the one with the sig I dont think its out of the question, I mean, who else has been as good as he in CF this year? And the series against the NYY really put him on the board with people. That is the key question...if Hunter played a full year he wouldn't have a shot, but aside from Ichiro, who else in the AL has played an incredible outfield all year?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 04:31 PM) Karko. If memory serves, he was actually pretty fast before he destroyed his knees.

The A's just came back from 4 down in the bottom of the 9th inning to avoid being swept by the Mariners. They got 2 men on then Everyday Eddie came in...he gave up a single to Kendall to load the bases, then back to back doubles by Kotsay and Chavez to tie the game...an intentional walk, a popped up bunt, and and infield single loaded the bases again. Nelson came in, and promptly walked in the winning run. Ouch.

Great piece here in The American Prospect updating us on the term of our new Ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton. I'll excerpt most of it, but not all, just in case anyone's worried about copyright stuff.

From the "Quotes that are too good not to post" file....

Dear Lord this will be fun.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Sep 7, 2005 -> 01:18 PM) http://www.uchospitals.edu/ - findings on frequency of mutation in humans. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/...50111170714.htm Humans Are A 'Privileged' Evolutionary Lineage Lahn: "The making of the large human brain is not just the neurological equivalent of making a large antler. Rather, it required a level of selection that's unprecedented. Our study offers the first genetic evidence that humans occupy a unique position in the tree of life." www.sciencedaily.com/search/?keyword=Bruce+Lahn&topic=all&dates=1995&dates=2005&sort=relevance I looked through those links you've given us, and I must say, hopefully without being edited in the future by the moderators, I think you're heavily misinterpreting the conclusions of the group you're citing. If I understand your argument correctly, you're saying that the person's research implies that there is a greater rate of mutation appearing within human development than within other species, something you're using to argue as evidence of the unique place of humans. However, I believe you are ignoring the key point...in particular through your selection of the text you quoted in this post. From the same article, I believe this excerpt sums up the problem with your reasoning: What the author is in fact saying is that there is a normal background rate of mutation, given by the rate of mutations that do not affect the phenotype. There is also a rate of mutations in proteins that are expressed in the phenotype of the organism. These two rates are identical. What the authors of this paper have found is that when a beneficial mutation did appear in human brain development, it was adopted with extraordinary speed. In other words...there was an incredibly huge selective advantage for a proto-human which posessed a larger and more developed brain. This is in fact no where near an argument for ID...it does show that human evolution has occupied a unique place in recent history in that there was some sort of extraordinary selective pressure towards larger brains for proto-humans. It does not say that the mutation rate in those genes was found to be different.