Kyyle23

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 04:15 PM) This deal will not get done. nice analysis. Did you work all night on that?

I got one of those Africa 6-1-9 scam letters sent to me last month. The first line said "Dear McMahon"(my last name). I found it humorous that the guy used just my last name, and showed my co-workers. The next thing I know, my 6-1-9 scam letter is photocopied, everyone in the office has a copy, and my "nickname" is now and forever just "McMahon" in my office. the second funniest part of the letter was the made up distant family member. My Great Uncle, the late Pitt McMahon. how many people do you know(or have you even heard of) with the first name Pitt?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 03:51 PM) So what you're saying is that ribs aren't sexy? Way too skinny. Is that some sort of edited scene? It looks like she has no bikini top on, but i definitely remember one in the movie.

QUOTE(knightni @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 03:50 PM) Isn't it a "herd of elephants"? it is, I had "Pachyderm" in my head when I wrote the title. If it is necessary for someone to change it, feel free to do so.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 03:46 PM) My professional opinion: really f***ing bad idea. It has some bad ecological ramifications, thats for sure. As soon as a herd of elephants goes rumbling through a fence and wandering wherever they please, and one has to be shot, PETA is gonna be all over it. I understand what they are saying about conservation of these animals though, it basically takes a small army to defend their conservation parks in Africa. its practically a free for all.

Could be a possibility if these guys and Ted Turner can work something out. Something tells me keeping these animals within park borders is going to be quite difficult. http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/08/17...a.ap/index.html

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:55 PM) I am too. I just meant the controller. The way they're keeping it a secret makes me a bit nervous. It better not be anything like Virtua Boy or the Power Glove... What? How can you be so down on the coolest thing that came out of the movie "The Wizard"? What a colossal ripoff that was. It wasnt applicable to any games, and the ones it did work for, werent worth it. Almost as bad as the running pad for the Olympic World Games.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:20 PM) Right now I'm going to stick with the Revolution. It should be about 200-250$. Free, dedicated online play. 100% Wireless. Wi-Fi enabled. And the best thing ever on a video game system: every Nintendo game ever is comes available with the Revolution(Yes, all NES games, SNES games, N64 games. and GameCube games). Im with you, Im pumped about the revolution. Im gonna make my first download "Romance of the three Kingdoms" and my second download will be "Final Fantasy 3" 2 games that super nintendo stopped me from finishing.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:43 PM) It better not be ridiculous... Im excited. I am a sucker for the classic nintendo games, and the newer versions of the classics. the only Zelda I didnt own was Majoras Mask and thats because my roomate had it.

QUOTE(tonyho7476 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:18 PM) I heard PS3 would be around $500...of course, that was early speculation. I don't think its ridiculous at all...the previous generation of consoles started at $299. Gamecube was cheaper, but inferior. When nintendo came out, they forced all of the other consoles to lower their prices to compete. It may have been inferior(and i love my Gamecube), but it sold like crazy when it came out a full 100 dollars cheaper buyers noticed. It all comes down to what the manufacturers want to do: 1. Start high, and lower the prices as the market dictates 2. Start low, force the markets to adjust to you(assuming your product can compete) and take away business from the competitors through cheaper pricing. Nintendo went the with #2 when Gamecube came out, and while they havent enjoyed the fanfare of PS2, and the awesome success of Halo + Halo2, they competed the whole time, and hardly showed any signs of slowing down. Pretty good considering many critics said Gamecube was the downfall of Nintendo. im really interested in the upcoming console wars though, this is a extremely different animal than what we are used to. this is going to be 3 top of the line consoles going head to head at the same time. PS1, Dreamcast, Xbox, N64, Gamecube, PS2, they all came out at different times. Its gonna be pretty cool to see the different approaches to marketing.

QUOTE(tonyho7476 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:06 PM) What's a joke? THe price? 400 dollars is pretty steep, regardless of the package. I know Sony and Nintendo are going to have smaller pricetags than that. Its always bad to come out with your stuff first. Gates has to start realizing the difference in Game Consoles and PCs. People need PCs for work, organization, etc. therefore the pricetags he slaps on his software is somewhat justified. But Gaming Consoles are pure entertainment, and on top of that they are cheaper within a year and out of date in 2 years.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 11:58 AM) http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/schedule...nt_dates_05.jsp Aug 1: Beginning today through the last day of the championship season, players may be assigned between Major League clubs ONLY after ML Waivers have been secured during the current waiver period. Oct 2: Official closing of the 2005 championship season Oct 3: Beginning today, players may be traded between ML clubs without waivers in effect. For certain, they could complete the trade so to speak on Oct 3rd. The question is can they complete it earlier so the Reds could get use of those players in Sept? You have to finalize your post-season roster by Sep 1st. I think that becomes the list of players that still require ML waivers til Oct 2nd. Any one not on that list might be considered an optional assignment. I'm checking on what their status would be. But it's certainly within the rules because it amounts to 2 separate trades in two different periods. But this is a unique trade scenario you are proposing, which isnt covered on those 3 tenets. If a trade is agreed upon during the waiver period, you would think that even if the players are moved at a later date, that they would be subject to a waiver period, because of the date that the trade was agreed upon. I like your idea, and I wish it would happen, but you would think the MLB CBA would prevent teams from doing such a thing.

I wouldnt mind Getting that kind of Smart. I forgot about Barbara Feldon.

QUOTE(mreye @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 11:20 AM) Could that mean injured?

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 11:18 AM) I'm not arguing anything. Just correcting. Petty... don't trip over that kettle next to ya. I would have to step over your two cents to do it. And they seem to be everywhere.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 11:19 AM) $$$. You're essentially agreeing on what BMac, & Anderson would mean in $ values to the Reds & applying that to the KGJ trade. The Reds use that added cost as collateral for the CWS to give them the players they want. It might have happened in the past. You would have to look at the Sep transaction logs to see evidence of it. I just dont think that you would be able to avoid the waiver deadline like that. It just seems that teams like the Yankees would just get who they want, and say "Yeah, after the waiver deadline I will give you the players you are asking for, but we have to wait." To me it makes the waiver deadline worthless. Whats the point of making it difficult to trade a player in August if you could circumvent the system on an agreement? Maybe I am just understanding it wrong.

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 10:56 AM) What does that have to do with anything...? Steff this is one of the pettier points you have ever argued. And thats saying alot.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 11:07 AM) There's one other way we can get BMac, Anderson to the Reds for KGJ but it requires the Reds to put their complete trust in the CWS. The two teams could split the one trade into 2 parts: during ML waiver period & after ML waiver period. The CWS would have to agree to pick up more of KGJ's contract as collateral for what they promise to give in return in talent in Sep. Aug: KGJ + $10M for mlers from the CWS that don't have to clear ML waivers Sep: $10M + some mlers from the Reds for a pkg of players the Reds want who are not on the CWS playoff roster I believe, that would allow the CWS to complete a trade involving BMac & Anderson for KGJ. Can you just go around the waiver period like that? From what I am understanding, the Reds will get their players after the waiver period, pretty much negating the waiver period overall. Why wouldnt trades like this happen more often?

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 10:45 AM) Adultry is against the law... And then, of course, there is that little matter of him being a Roman Catholic monsignor... when is the last time you saw someone arrested for adultery?

QUOTE(The Critic @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 10:37 AM) Hey, at least it ain't a kid....... LOL, thats true. At least he didnt break any laws.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 10:24 AM) No it's common sense. This isn't X-Box. It's the real world. There's consequences for the dumb-arse moves you make. riiiiiight. Just get back to me when you find something saying that All other GMS agreed not to pick up a highly touted prospect going through waivers. You see, the X Box statement is funny because it is commonly used when someone around Soxtalk is being incredibly unrealistic with their trades, and you throw it at me when you are inferring that one (possibly two, Anderson and BMac) top prospects are just going to pass through waivers to accomodate a trade, on the theory that noone else is going to claim them because they are worried Kenny wont deal with them years down the road. Pot, meet kettle.

SI.com still has him listed as a Raider. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4745/ No transactions either showing that he was cut.

Also, how could any organization fault another organization for blocking a trade that would add one of the best left-handed hitters of our generation to the team with (currently) the best record in the league? I dont understand how 4 years down the line Kenny would care about what happened this year.

QUOTE(retro1983hat @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 08:14 AM) They are both acting like immature children. Including today's remarks by Mariotti that "Sammy Sosa also cleared waivers, but there's a better chance of Harrelson being invited to my next party, even if Metamucil is served as an appetizer." Grow up guys! Who would go to a party hosted by Mariotti? he is the first one muted on ATH, and noone ever agrees with him there, and he has ripped on pretty much every sports team in Chicago, and even has problems with other columnists at his own paper. Its an even funnier line when I think about it like that.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 10:14 AM) First off you don't just put him on the list. You call the GM's first & get agreement from those teams that can claim before the Reds. A refusal to agree would not only spoil trade relations but it could also come back & haunt that non-contender. Say a few years down the road that team reverses roles with either the CWS or the Reds. The Reds or CWS would then be inclined to return the favor. Secondly if a non-contender did decide to play the spoiler (even after giving their word not to) you can always pull the player back. The only risk is that you get a one shot deal involving that player. For someone who puts so much worth in hard facts, you sure are willing to believe in alot of assumptions.