It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:46 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 3:49 pm
Posts: 4430
pizza_Place: Rosati's
No sitting or lying down. Always standing while watching television.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
No. Not possible.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 11486
pizza_Place: Dino's
And pees sitting down.

_________________
Sex isn't dirty, sex isn't a crime. It's a loving act between two or more consenting adults.

-Hank Kingsley


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54158
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
I watch sports standing up but scripted shows sitting down. I bet he paces too.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
He made a terrible argument during transition. Said neither the Cubs nor the Sox have any risk from the trade.

Surprisingly, Spiegel and Rozner put him in his place handily and quickly. He pretty much just changed the subject when they told him how dumb he was.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:15 pm
Posts: 48753
Location: Bohemian Club Annual World Power Consolidation Conference & Golf Outing
pizza_Place: World Fluoridation Conspiracy Pizza & WINGS!
Ron Wolfley wrote:
No sitting or lying down. Always standing while watching television.


Just wait until the entropy hits him.

_________________
https://twitter.com/DrKenCast


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 1:50 am
Posts: 11175
Location: Schaumburg
pizza_Place: Palermo's
Tuned in at 3:47 and they were talking about LeBron James and how much he has meant to Cleveland's economy. It's almost like the show has become a parody of how it's described on the board.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:05 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Posts: 33816
I watch sports games standing up a good percentage of the time. Especially Bears games. So I don't think it's that weird. I can't be still during some sports games. I gotta move around.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54158
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Tad Queasy wrote:
Tuned in at 3:47 and they were talking about LeBron James and how much he has meant to Cleveland's economy. It's almost like the show has become a parody of how it's described on the board.

Jim Gray wrote:
Experts call it "the LeBron-omy," a commodities exJames.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 3:49 pm
Posts: 4430
pizza_Place: Rosati's
Jason and Dan aren't Barstool fans.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3877
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
leashyourkids wrote:
He made a terrible argument during transition. Said neither the Cubs nor the Sox have any risk from the trade.

Surprisingly, Spiegel and Rozner put him in his place handily and quickly. He pretty much just changed the subject when they told him how dumb he was.


I agree with Bernstein. Who has risk in this trade and how much? A trade can turn out to be awful and one-sided but that doesn't mean it was a mistake at the time.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:41 am
Posts: 678
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Not good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
DAC wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
He made a terrible argument during transition. Said neither the Cubs nor the Sox have any risk from the trade.

Surprisingly, Spiegel and Rozner put him in his place handily and quickly. He pretty much just changed the subject when they told him how dumb he was.


I agree with Bernstein. Who has risk in this trade and how much? A trade can turn out to be awful and one-sided but that doesn't mean it was a mistake at the time.


So you think all trades carry no risk, correct?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
I don't think it's too risky for the Cubs. It's insane to say there's no risk on the Sox end.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54158
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Posts: 33816
Bernstein is an idiot.

There is a risk for both teams. If the Sox could have gotten a better players from the Brewers or Astros then they fucked up. We'll see how it turns out. And if Quintana sucks for the Cubs over the next few years then they could have spent their assets better.

It was the decision they both made and there might have been better options. We'll see how it turns out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Even though both teams have risk, the Cubs have more. The Sox gave up a known guy. The Cubs gave up guys who could potentially be great.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3877
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
leashyourkids wrote:
DAC wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
He made a terrible argument during transition. Said neither the Cubs nor the Sox have any risk from the trade.

Surprisingly, Spiegel and Rozner put him in his place handily and quickly. He pretty much just changed the subject when they told him how dumb he was.


I agree with Bernstein. Who has risk in this trade and how much? A trade can turn out to be awful and one-sided but that doesn't mean it was a mistake at the time.


So you think all trades carry no risk, correct?


I didn't say that.

Some trades are risky but in this case you have a proven #2 starter on a great contract for 3.5 more seasons. They gave up a top 10 prospect another 75ish prospect and a couple throw-in guys. It is an extremely logical and defensible deal for both teams. The Cubs or Sox can lose the trade but that doesn't change the fact that it was a solid trade at the time.

I think the Hawks trade of Hammer for Murphy is a lot more risky.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
DAC wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
DAC wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
He made a terrible argument during transition. Said neither the Cubs nor the Sox have any risk from the trade.

Surprisingly, Spiegel and Rozner put him in his place handily and quickly. He pretty much just changed the subject when they told him how dumb he was.


I agree with Bernstein. Who has risk in this trade and how much? A trade can turn out to be awful and one-sided but that doesn't mean it was a mistake at the time.


So you think all trades carry no risk, correct?


I didn't say that.

Some trades are risky but in this case you have a proven #2 starter on a great contract for 3.5 more seasons. They gave up a top 10 prospect another 75ish prospect and a couple throw-in guys. It is an extremely logical and defensible deal for both teams. The Cubs or Sox can lose the trade but that doesn't change the fact that it was a solid trade at the time.

I think the Hawks trade of Hammer for Murphy is a lot more risky.


Nothing you said means there is no risk for either team.

If Quintana underperformed and Jimenez is the next Nick Swisher, the Cubs look bad.

If none of those prospects pan out, Hahn should have gotten more from someone else.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3877
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
leashyourkids wrote:
Even though both teams have risk, the Cubs have more. The Sox gave up a known guy. The Cubs gave up guys who could potentially be great.


But the fact that they are so far away removes a lot of the risk for the Cubs. We all know they could turn into all-star, HOF players but they are still prospects at this point and that is unlikely. The Cubs got the known commodity while the Sox received much more uncertainty. You tell me what's more likely- that Quintana will be a #2-#3 pitcher for the next 3.5 seasons or that Jimenez will develop into a multi-year allstar and Cease will be a starting pitcher in 4-5 seasons?

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Posts: 33816
FavreFan wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.


They weren't winning anything with Quintana. But it was about the choice to go with the Cubs top 2 prospects over what anybody else offered. If the others offers turn out that they would have been better, they fucked up. That's the risk, like I said. The choice is the risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38014
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
FavreFan wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.

Even if Jimenez busts, all they Sox gave up was a career ( at best) .500 pitcher. Not exactly Brock for Broglio.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38014
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Ron Wolfley wrote:
Jason and Dan aren't Barstool fans.

Shocking.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38014
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Curious Hair wrote:
Tad Queasy wrote:
Tuned in at 3:47 and they were talking about LeBron James and how much he has meant to Cleveland's economy. It's almost like the show has become a parody of how it's described on the board.

Jim Gray wrote:
Experts call it "the LeBron-omy," a commodities exJames.

:lol: :lol: . Lebron is basically their Brett Favre to John Madden.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72289
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
badrogue17 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.

Even if Jimenez busts, all they Sox gave up was a career ( at best) .500 pitcher. Not exactly Brock for Broglio.

Yeah but everyone else thinks he's good. And giving him up in his prime on that contract for a return that ends up being all busts would really suck. He does have value.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:15 pm
Posts: 48753
Location: Bohemian Club Annual World Power Consolidation Conference & Golf Outing
pizza_Place: World Fluoridation Conspiracy Pizza & WINGS!
FavreFan wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.

Even if Jimenez busts, all they Sox gave up was a career ( at best) .500 pitcher. Not exactly Brock for Broglio.

Yeah but everyone else thinks he's good. And giving him up in his prime on that contract for a return that ends up being all busts would really suck. He does have value.


I think I'm going to have to rewatch Better Call Saul because you know what you are talking about here.

Bird in the hand. 28-year-old lefty with a proven track record of success and inning-eating with 3+ years of control.

If that doesn't work out, it's just bad luck.

_________________
https://twitter.com/DrKenCast


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3877
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
leashyourkids wrote:

Nothing you said means there is no risk for either team.

If Quintana underperformed and Jimenez is the next Nick Swisher, the Cubs look bad.

If none of those prospects pan out, Hahn should have gotten more from someone else.


I guess the more I think about it, a better way I could phrase it is that this is a safe trade for both teams. Yes, there is risk that either team can win or lose the trade but even if the return for the Cubs or Sox doesn't pan out, it was still a logical, even trade at the time it was made.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38014
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
FavreFan wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Isn't there way more risk on the Cubs? They gave up a lot for an okay pitcher. If the prospects pan out, the Sox get a lot, if they don't, well, they weren't winning anything with Quintana anyway.

I look at it as the Cubs know what they got. Jimenez might be great but he might suck too.

Even if Jimenez busts, all they Sox gave up was a career ( at best) .500 pitcher. Not exactly Brock for Broglio.

Yeah but everyone else thinks he's good. And giving him up in his prime on that contract for a return that ends up being all busts would really suck. He does have value.

:lol: Well yeah. I guess at least the teams can say we weren't paying him a bunch of money not to win games for us.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27570
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
Alright rogue, I know you are in the camp with jorr, FF and one or two other guys on Q, Lackey was a pretty valuable pitcher last year for us, he was 11-8 with 3.35 era.... You don't think Q can outdo that next year for half the salary?

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group