Old Leather, Angels Batting Order, and Uncle Scrooge McCourt: Halolinks
by WiHaloFan on Feb 24, 2010 8:15 AM PST
in Angels News
98 comments
With all of the new, highly evolved stats that have been introduced, I wonder why no one has done a study about the impact of the gloves used by fielders throughout the history of the game. Hanging on the wall of my den is an old glove I had bought at a swap meet quite a few years ago. Like most gloves, this one has a popular player's name embossed in the leather, this one features "Bill Jurges". I had never heard of Bill Jurges before, so, jumping over to baseball-reference, I found out Jurges played shortstop for the Cubs and Giants from 1931 to 1947 and was a National league all-star in '37, '39 and 1940. Jurges even received 2 Hall of Fame votes in 1949. Here's what Jurges' wikipedia page has:
Jurges was born in Bronx, New York. A right-handed batter and thrower, he was a light hitter — he batted only .258 in 1,816 games over 17 seasons — but a good defensive shortstop. During his eight seasons (1931-38) in Chicago, he anchored an infield of Stan Hack (third base), Billy Herman (second base), and Charlie Grimm or Phil Cavarretta (first base). He then played seven more seasons (1939-45) with the New York Giants before returning to the Cubs as a player-coach (1946-47) and non-playing coach (1948) under manager Grimm. In 1940, he was hit in the head by a pitched ball and missed over 90 games, but he recovered to play regularly for the Giants from 1941-43.
It also mentioned Jurges managed the Red Sox 80 games in 1959. However, the most interesting thing I read had to do with an incident that happened off of the field.
On July 6, 1932, Violet Valli, a showgirl with whom Jurges was romantically linked, tried to kill Jurges at the Hotel Carlos, where both lived. Jurges had previously tried to end their relationship. Valli (born Violet Popovich) also left a suicide note in which she blamed Cubs outfielder Kiki Cuyler for convincing Jurges to break up with her. Although initial reports stated that Jurges was shot while trying to wrestle the gun from Valli, later reports, based on Valli's suicide note, stated that she was trying to kill Jurges as well as commit suicide.
This incident would form the basis for portions of Bernard Malamud's novel The Natural.
A week after the shooting, charges were dismissed against Valli when Jurges appeared in court and announced that he would not testify and wished to drop the charges.
Anyway, back to the glove. When you put on, the "fingers" barely extend past my own, and doesn't feature much of a pocket. The webbing consists of a lone strap of leather about 2 inches long between the thumb and index finger. Compared to modern-day gloves, the gloves from this era could not match the advantages players had with gloves made over the last 40-50 years. How much did this impact pre-1950 hitting stats when diving plays by an infielder were not benefited by gloves that extended an additional 3 to 4 inches and featured a deeper pocket and webbing? How many home runs are brought back into the park by outfielders reaching over the fence with over-sized gloves?
If anyone has read of a study that equipment has had on statistics, please let me know. In the meantime, here are today's links:
Scioscia thinking about Angels' batting order - CBSSports.com Baseball
On the first day position players reported to camp, Angels manager Mike Scioscia shed a little bit of light on what his batting order will look like. It sounds as though he likes Bobby Abreu in the No. 2 slot with Torii Hunter, Hideki Matsui, Kendry Morales, Juan Rivera and Howie Kendrick to follow.
The article also mentions Aybar and Izturis as lead-off candidates.
Tax men strike out against McCourts - latimes.com
The McCourts, who own the Los Angeles Dodgers (so she says; he says he's the owner and she's not), jointly pocketed income totaling $108 million from 2004 through 2009, according to documents Jamie McCourt recently filed in the couple's divorce case in Los Angeles County Superior Court. On that sum, they paid zero federal and state income tax.
I'm sure there are two sides to this story. Something that recounts the billions of dollars the McCourts spent on building ball fields for under-privileged kids, hours spent at soup kitchens, etc. I'm sure of it...right?
Rangers believe Guerrero will return to greatness - Daily Pitch: USATODAY.com
Vladimir Guerrero arrived Tuesday into the Texas Rangers' camp, and before even stepping into the cage, manager Ron Washington is anticipating greatness.
Yes, I hope Vlad has a great season and leads the Rangers to a second-place finish in the A.L. West. Heck, they can even have the wild card.
The Angels, Pecota, and some BS from BJ - THE BOOK
Let me start with James. Sometimes I wonder how such a smart guy can write such dumb things. "We know it is not luck." We obviously don’t know that it is not luck simply because it "happens every year," and a smart and responsible sabermetrician would never say something like that.
Another Angels/Pecota story, but this one features heresy by disagreeing with Bill James. Have mercy on their soul lest they perish into the vast darkness of the non-VORPness that befalls the unenlightened!
Fan sues Royals claiming hot dog almost put out his eye - CBSSports.com Baseball
John Coomer has filed a lawsuit against the Royals seeking more than $25,000 for injuries he sustained Sept. 8 when he was smacked in the eye with a hot dog chucked by the team's mascot, Sluggerrr.
Look, how many times do I have to tell you...Stay out of the restroom when the mascot is peeing!
February 24 - BR Bullpen
1960 - Nick Esasky, infielder
Nothing spectacular about this, just like the way his name rolls off the tongue. Nnnnick Eeessaasskee.
0 recs |
98 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
My vote
I would say that equipment made the most difference, simply because with the old school ball, glove and bat, you barely have the same game. For that reason, making comparisons between modern baseball and turn of the century baseball is like comparing checkers to chess, or street stickball to baseball.
At least with expansion and even integration, you are just talking about the people playing the game, you’re not as much talking about the fundamental game itself.
On the subject of Vlad, I fully expect him to win “Comeback Player of the Year” at some point in the next couple years. He has at least 2-3 really good years left in him, its just somewhat unclear when those years will take place.
Scioscia has been really confusing about Wood lately.
The same day an article comes out talking about Izturis leading off, another comes out with Scioscia praising Wood and saying he will be an incredibly valuable player.
Yesterday there was an article about it, and Scioscia said that Wood’s glove could keep him in the starting lineup through some batting slumps.
Usually means you're hitting in the .280-.300 range
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 10:59 AM PST up reply actions
As I was reading about this old Cub
My mind immediately went to The Natural. I’m glad I wasn’t far off. That was a good book, although it was very different than the movie. In fact, I think I might actually have liked the movie better.
by BruinHalo on Feb 24, 2010 9:00 AM PST via mobile reply actions
my great -uncle is The 'Yankee Clipper"
and I have an old glove that he used for practices and ‘public demonstrations’ I only put it on once to play catch and was amazed. i think that betweem the bats and gloves and sub par cleats, I would love to see todays athletes compete using old equipment. They old timers day, why not old timers equipment day.
they can have the umps stand behind the pitcher, have bases that aren’t bolted down, and they can raise the mound back up and make the strike zone anything near the plate. Then lets see how great some of these players are
My prediction as of 12-11-2009- Wood .265 avg, 20 HRs 70 RBIs and an above average glove at 3b
by Sinatrasratpack on Feb 24, 2010 9:30 AM PST reply actions
Your great uncle was married to Marilyn Monroe
and all you have to share is bolting down the bases?!?
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I'd like to have bolted down her base, if you know what I mean...
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
by red floyd on Feb 24, 2010 6:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I think I would just "evolution"...
Take into consideration everything that has changed. I.E. equipment, technology, approaches to the game. I mean think about watching video of your batting stance, or all the different pitches that pitchers have come up with in just the last 50 or 60 years. In addition, we understand what muscles need to be focused on when training and how to whip into shape a player depending on their position and what kind of batter they are.
I think its impossible to single out one thing that has made an impact…
Halos & Clips...must have something to do with the color red and jaded pasts...
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Feb 24, 2010 10:10 AM PST reply actions
The story about the McCourts is must-reading
These two are such odious people that it makes one thank God for Arte Moreno. I’ll never attend an event at Dodger Stadium (ANY event, baseball or otherwise) until the McCourts are disassociated from the team.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
If no laws were broken
You can’t really begrudge them for being money savvy (or at least being savvy enough to have good accountants on their payroll). I’d love to outsmart the IRS.
That said, there are still plenty of other reasons left to hate the McCourts.
The trouble is that they may not have been outsmarting the IRS
They would have been outsmarting the police, fire department, education system, the highway funds that keep the roads they use everyday in working order, and so on.
It’s one thing to outsmart the IRS when they are trying to screw you. It’s quite another when you’re living a charmed, aristocratic lifestyle with eight mansions and you actively seek ways to get out of paying any of your obligations to society.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I used to prepare taxes for a living
This is a very ridiculous way to look at it.
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
I think you and I probably have a fundamentally different idea of what an individual's "obligations to society" are
But anyway, if the McCourts can find a way to legally manipulate the tax system such that they don’t end up paying income tax, we should blame the system and not the McCourts.
So who is in charge of deciding
what my “obligations” are to society. Oh, you are a writer, well your obligation is to write to educate the children, get to work…. See that is bullshit.
Instead of 3 separate replies, I'll do all 3 in 1
hauldog – Explain to me why it’s ridiculous. Granted, what I said may have been an oversimplification, but the main purpose of taxes is so the government can provide emergency and public services of various sorts is it not? By getting out of paying taxes (legal or not), you essentially pay nothing for those services.
Higz – You might be right that their actions were within reason. If that’s the case, then yes, the system is to blame. All I said at the end was IF the McCourts didn’t pay taxes that they should have under the law, then they were in the wrong.
Rev – Bullshit or not, that’s the system of government we live under and that’s what our various representatives are supposed to decide. When our house catches on fire, we all want the fire department to show up and put it out. When we drive to see grandma, we like the roads to paved, not made of dirt or broken up and full of potholes and ruts. When you send your kids to school, you want them to actually learn things. All of that and more is what tax money goes to. Paying your fair share to benefit everyone (including yourself) shouldn’t be an issue.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe this example might help
Let’s say I own a beach front property that I originally purchased for $350,000 and is now worth $500,000 and you happen to own a commercial building that you once bought for $600,000 but due to market conditions has since declined in value to $500,000. Now you sell your building for $500,000 and buy my property for that same amount – didn’t you just suffer a very real $100,000 loss? Just as I am now required to pay taxes on my $150,000 gain, you are likewise entitled to receive a tax benefit for that $100,000 loss you suffered on your side of the same transaction.
Let’s say you only made $40,000 in income at your job in the year we made our deal. Since you suffered a $100,000 loss, you won’t have to pay any taxes since as you are allowed to offset all $40,000 of your job income against that loss. Since you still have $60,000 of remaining loss that you couldn’t use, you are allowed to carry that unused tax benefit forward and use it the following year.
This is a highly simplified example of how the McCourts avoided paying income taxes – they’re not cheating or taking advantage of any legal loopholes – they’ve paid their fair share of taxes in years where they’ve made gains and conversely, are entitled to not pay taxes in years where they’ve either suffered losses or had past losses that they couldn’t use completely.
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 24, 2010 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Clear as can be
And Hiltzik’s article is about seizing an opportune straw man to advance his own political beliefs. It is not about the McCourts per se, but about the author’s view that society is endlessly shat-upon by those who have prospered.
I’m not interested in defending the McCourts. I doubt they warrant it. But this was a political piece, not a baseball intrigue piece.
"Sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
Your example makes sense
If that’s genuinely what happened, then yes it’s legal and the system is at fault for allowing such loopholes. The article does allow for that, whether you agree with the writer or not.
However, the practical and potentially ethical dimensions of the situation could still be open to debate. You have to admit that the idea of two mega-millionaires, who own 8 houses, a successful MLB franchise in the 2nd biggest national market, and God knows what else, not being able to pay taxes on their income is…difficult to swallow to say the least.
How do you rectify the McCourts not having to pay taxes when a working family with 2-3 kids and possibly grandparents to support has to pay taxes on say $60-70K a year? Or when someone just out of college like me pays taxes even though I have more student loan debt than I make in earnings per year? While not being wrong in a legal sense, you have to admit it’s impractical and a bit one-sided and archaic.
Anway, thanks for explaining.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
The current tax code is a a GODDAMN joke...
…as I am reminded every year about this time. It is supposed to be “socially engineered” (or progressive!) to hit the wealthy the hardest.
In reality, the wealthy discover one loophole or the other to defer or completely avoid paying “…their fair share”, whatever the hell that is. And inevitably, the tax burden shifts to middle class taxpayers. Study the evolution of the ATM (alternative minimum tax) as an example.
It shouldn’t take a CPA to determine the amount of tax due and payable by any individual or corporation. One’s taxable burden should be simple, clear, and easily understandable. What we currently have meets none of those criteria.
Unfortunately, reform of the tax code isn’t even on the national radar…no hope and change where it’s really needed.
The wealthier you are
the more you can afford the resources to help protect your wealth.
Pretty simple, really.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 7:51 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that it really is that simple.
But it shouldn’t be that way. As far as I can tell, everyone in California pays sales tax, regardless of their level of income. Some have found a way around this tax for certain items (black market sales as an example), but I believe it is – in effect – far more fair, simple, clear, and understandable than the current income tax scheme (state and federal).
This isn’t an argument for a national sales tax. It is an argument for an alternative that provides revenue to the government while meeting the criteria listed above.
Nevermind the black market
Amazon is still sales tax free!
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 8:19 PM PST up reply actions
...and therefore my favorite place to shop.
Although I read yesterday that California is considering taxing their sales in California. Once again, paradise lost.
Better stock up quick, then.
I heard the same recently…but then again, I’ve heard that “threat” for years now, and yet here I am, buying various stuff I don’t even need without a 9.75% markup!
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 8:58 PM PST up reply actions
In my neck of the woods
not everywhere.
And that’s not even the worst in the country.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 25, 2010 7:10 AM PST up reply actions
Depends on county
Orange Co. is 8.25%
Yeah, aside from the weather and the girls, California pretty much blows and it’s getting worse
I also like the fact
that the beach, snow, desert, forest type stuff is all within an hours car ride from where I live
R.I.P. King Ad-Rock #34
Well...
We COULD take the current tax code and all copies of it and burn them as an alternative fuel source.
Might be a good start and a way to kill two birds with one stone! ;)
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 7:54 PM PST up reply actions
Or we can burn the tax code to heat the McCourt's olympic sized swimming pool
and then have them request a tax break for finding such an alternative heating source.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 7:57 PM PST up reply actions
If they burned the tax code to heat their pool..
…we might be able to get them arrested for violating some SCAQMD regulations…you know, air pollution and all.
If they changed the tax code,
the entire financial system underpinning major league baseball would collapse.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I paid $8,500 in student loan INTEREST this year
And the IRS was nice enough to inform me that I can only claim $2,500 as a deduction. To that, I say HORSESHIT. The interest was real, and it was really paid, and I can prove it. I shouldn’t pay a goddamn dime on it.
To you, I say amen.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 7:50 PM PST up reply actions
Ouch!
Hence why I won’t be going to law or grad school any time in the foreseeable future.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 7:58 PM PST up reply actions
I didn't go to either...yet
100K for an undergrad education. Parents’ income too high for FAFSA, but same parents also too broke from divorce debt to afford college…I’m the perfect tweener to be fucked by a broken system that won’t pay for a kid to go to college because of the bullshit social expectation that a parent “should” do it. Well, they didn’t do it…and the government doesn’t seem to care why they didn’t, that’s all the grounds they need to deny me any aid. Now I get to pay it all off myself…and the only scholarship I ever got? Well, the state of California is trying its damndest to make sure I never see a dime of it. Nevermind that I earned it and that it’s currently sitting in an account in my name or anything…I’m “not allowed” to touch it. Why not? Good question.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 8:18 PM PST up reply actions
And no, the loan isn't at 8.5% interest
it was just my first full year out of school, and the compounded interest that was added to the principle from my four years in school was all being paid this year.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 8:20 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah I feel ya
It’s going on a year and a half since I finished undergrad and almost a year since I started making loan payments. Thankfully, I had the Reserve GI Bill to help for the first couple of years, although it’s a fraction of the standard GI Bill.
My parents too fell into the same category, although they weren’t divorced. They helped me out where they could and took out a Federal Parent Loan one year, but the bulk of my education was paid by me, via two loans. I added up what I paid in interest for 2009 the other day and the figure was something like $1400-$1700. I can’t imagine what this would be after 3-4 years of post-grad, especially in law school where they make you sign an agreement to only work part-time during school.
So far that degree I paid for hasn’t managed to get me a job that breaks $15/hr. Sure, I could go for a masters or JD and get a better job if I take out more loans, but my proportion of debt-to-income probably wouldn’t change much. I sometimes describe it as “fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
I graduated May '08
Worked at a job that started in June that was paying at a rate of about $40k/year. I thought I had struck it big time at that point. Then the job was “over” (no, I wasn’t fired), and I spent 4 1/2 months unemployed, followed by almost the last year floating around the $10-15/hr jobs. All around me people from my same graduating class or same age group with far fewer credentials to their name are beating me down. Hard not to get really, really frustrated.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 8:56 PM PST up reply actions
I was Dec '08
Went Dec-April without any work besides my last few drills with the Marine Reserve, which only got me about $200 a month.
Then, I had a temp job that I hoped would last long term but it didn’t. Then, I ended up where I’m at now, which is actually a pretty good job that I like for the present. It’s just that, economically, it’s not gonna get me anywhere and I certainly didn’t need to spend tens of thousands on education to get it. There doesn’t seem to be anything better out there either.
It is definitely very frustrating. It’s even worse when banks that might hold your loans get billions to payoff bad investments/crappy managing, or when you pay more taxes than someone who makes literally hundreds to thousands of times more than you because of legal loopholes.
I worry for our generation.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 10:13 PM PST up reply actions
FAFSA. More Bullshit.
We, as parents, made way too much money to qualify for any breaks and we knew that going in. But, holy fucking balls of hell, we were still FORCED to fill out that blithering FAFSA every crapping year. Twice some years. And FORCED to answer every one of their repeating trick questions that attempted to get us to slip up and confess that we actually did have to pay all that we were trying to tell them we had to pay anyway.
But here is one for all you NCAA rules followers: when my youngest son entered college, the school of my oldest son realized that they were on the hook for cutting their tuition some. The way they chose to solve the problem was to “hire” my oldest son for some manual labor job, but inform him privately that he never actually had to report for any work. Imagine if he were an athlete at, say, USC. Think about that one a while.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
The best thing I got in college
was some colossal fuck-up made by the accounting department wherein I was in a work study program, getting paid 8 bucks an hour. Over the year I made about 3 grand, which was supposed to be me ‘working off’ part of the tuition. But through their fuck up, I not only received a paycheck for my work, but it ALSO counted the money off my tuition…i.e., I got paid double.
But seeing as I was bent over the table to go to a fucking public school in the first place, that ain’t my problem to report to them. Plus, they put the nail in the coffin when they asked for $20,000+ a year, and then had the balls to try to chase me down for a $15 fine for a lost key (that, oh by the way, THEY lost after it was turned in) for more than two years. Still haven’t paid.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 9:53 PM PST up reply actions
So doesn't it just a delightful opportunity
when you get that call from some eager-eyed undergrad calling you up as an alum and asking for you to donate???
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I get stuff in the mail all the time
Still waiting for the phone call, though. I’ll gladly have it go something like this:
Them: “As a recent graduate and current alum, we would like to extend the opportunity to you for you to donate to keep your campus and community strong.”
Me: “You have a job for me?”
Them: “Uh…no.”
Me: “Call me when you do.” click
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 10:21 PM PST up reply actions
Good man.
Start lining up those responses now. The opportunities to use them just keep on coming.
Mine usually run along the lines of “Well, gee, let me think about this. Oh, yeah. I already donated $160,000 for my son’s education there. Feel free to call me back when you catch up.”
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Alum?
Ha! My daughter is currently a student at a UC (specific campus not named to protect the guilty), and I get calls from those eager-eyed undergrads. I tell them that I’m already paying the university $25K/year, and they can go suck it.
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
The thing is
And I realized this about halfway through college, is that even public universities have become big businesses. The private ones have been that way since the very beginning.
Sure, the public ones are still the cheaper route, but they are by no means cheap, and the government (state or federal) doesn’t put enough money into the system to cover all of the operating costs. The unversities have to raise tuition, room/board, etc to keep their bottom line steady, keep good professors, continue operating sports and academic programs, etc. Tuition increased every single year I was at SDSU and from what I know it’s gotten even worse now.
Your one hope is if you go to a school with big sports programs that bring in a lot of media and sponsorship money. At least those schools have a chance to keep all of their clubs, athletics, and other programs open using football team revenue. It’s sad that’s what it comes down to. The last I checked, universities were supposed to be about education, not sports revenue and profit.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 25, 2010 8:43 AM PST up reply actions
Actually, the part that you are missing,
is that the more money that the government puts into the system, the more that the colleges and universities raise the costs of their fees and services so as to grab their share of those funds.
Kind of interesting when one considers that the “product” that an institution of higher education puts forth is rather static over time. I mean, really, the paper degree is the same. And has there really been that much dynamism in the field of philosophy or mathematics or the early history of western civilization over the past 5 years that the curriculum has had to grow 5% per year? Uh, no.
So you pretty much have the same goods and services being delivered using the same overhead year over year. It’s natural to expect cost of living adjustments due to external inflation rates. But there is more inflation within the college ranks than there is out among the greater economy. And the growth spurts within the college ranks are sharper, more accelerated, whenever the government infuses new capital into the system.
It’s a simple land grab.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Yup. It's the most basic economics.
The more money the government (or any other entity for that matter) makes available for certain activities (in this case, a college education), the more those activities will rise in cost.
Scholarships and college loans can easily be re-named the Professor Full Employment Act.
Kind of interesting, considering the amount
of Marxism that exists in modern American academia.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
If higher education was more publicly funded
The cost to students and their parents would go down because they wouldn’t need loans or as many scholarships.
The problem is more along the lines of how schools allocate their funds. Take SDSU for example, outside of basketball Aztec sports teams are mediocre at best. Yet, the football coach we had while I was there was getting millions. So is his replacement from what I know. During my last semester there was a huge uproar over a number of clubs and university services being shut down and they were talking about letting professors go, yet the football team was getting loads of money to suck ass. Students and professors were both asking, why do we need a football program? It should have been given to some of the academic programs or professors that are more useful. The reason is because universities see sports as a way to make money, and invest in that in the hopes of big profits.
Now sure, there are some faculty and staff out there that are raking it in. I never really encountered any of them though, and the ones I had at SDSU pulled their weight as far as courseload and class size. Imagine trying to teach 2 or 3 sections of economics or international relations to rooms of anywhere from 75-300 students each. It wasn’t until late upper division I started seeing class sizes down in the 20’s and 30’s, and they were still kind of rare.
The problem isn’t the staff, it’s the board spending it’s money on crap that has nothing to do with academics or the students in general.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 25, 2010 5:01 PM PST up reply actions
And what evidence do you have
that having access to even more money would alter the behavior of all the principals you mention?
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Make the funds conditional upon government regulation
When you apply for a loan, many are disbursed to the school, not the student, in order to cover educations costs per semester. If you get loans disbursed to the student, like I did, there is a limit to how much you can borrow.
The government could say, “we’re only giving you $X million dollars if you put it towards academics, tuition, maintenance, etc” and then follow up on that. My point is, they are state schools, (San Diego State, University of California at Long Beach), so they shouldn’t be so damn expensive. They seem to have found a way to make it work in Europe, and their kids come out smart and virtually debt free compared to us.
I was just pointing out that the problem isn’t professors and faculty, especially not from my experience. SDSU for example, could have dumped their worthless football program and paid for more professors or more dorms, both of which that school needs.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 25, 2010 6:05 PM PST up reply actions
Sounds like all tose good intentions that paved the way for the Cal Lottery.
And all that did was motivate the managers to free up more of the funds previously committed to basic needs and move them over to non-mainstream expenses. This was possible, because now government money was backfilling the mainstream expenses.
Basically, fixing the problems that come with more government funding by adding more government control pretty much sums up the budget turmoil that is the State of California today.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
As with any issue involving lots of people and organizations
The devil is in the details. A well written and well implemented law can do a lot.
All I know is that the current system puts American students and their parents at a disadvantage compared to many of their foreign counterparts. At the rate we’re going, I won’t be surprised if putting one of my future kids through a state college costs $80-100K or more.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 26, 2010 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
Uh, Long Beach is a CSU, not a UC, but other than that....
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
LOL, my bad
I was typing this really quickly before I left work. Was thinking UCSB.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 26, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
Or...
FAFSA says “you ain’t gettin’ no aid” because income too high, but two kids in college.
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
Any form that decies your aid based solely on income
is a bogus fucking concept.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Feb 24, 2010 9:50 PM PST up reply actions
Tax Losses
The McCourts generated substantial tax losses (legally) which were used to offset the income kicked off by the Dodgers. Nothing nefarious here. Nothing that shows they are unwilling to fufill their social obligation. Once the losses are used they will have to pay taxes.
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
Again, that wasn't my point
I was simply pointing out that the McCourts have acted like money was tight, insofar as the franchise was concerned, while they have been bleeding cash from the Dodgers since they took ownership.
For instance, take away those $600K salary paid to the two sons to do absolutely nothing and a good draft pick or two could be signed. Once upon a time, the Dodger franchise was a jewel. By the time News Corp and McCourt had their times at the helm, it is little more than a cheap circus.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 25, 2010 1:23 PM PST up reply actions
When McCourt took over, my comment was...
Frank McCourt… the onlyi guy who could make FOX look good as an owner.
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
and I never responded to you
I responded to Commander Nate regarding his comments that the McCourts are shrugging off their obligation to society.
I think the McCourts are cheap SOB’s. Read the article on their financial plan through 2020 or something.
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
They have a plan?!?
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 25, 2010 5:41 PM PST up reply actions
Just like the Cylons
Angels baseball. We do what we must, because we can -- HaloDutch
by red floyd on Feb 26, 2010 9:01 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Or the Borg.
OR THE ROMULANS!!!
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 26, 2010 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes to not raise payroll over the next ten years and triple revenue.
Basically cash cow the thing and F the fans.
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
Like I said above
Legal or not, there’s still ethical and practical issues with it. There’s something impractical about millionaires paying less in taxes than all of us thousandaires.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 26, 2010 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
Depends if the tax code is ethical or not
Many feel ours isn’t, and you can certainly argue it’s not as practical as it could be.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 26, 2010 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
+1 on out-smarting the IRS.
I love this team.
by Downing Rules on Feb 24, 2010 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
When I saw the words "Old Leather" and "McCourt" all in the same sentence, I was thinking…
Based purely on my own speculation, I’m guessing that much of the $135 million dollar net operating loss that has kept the McCourts from paying taxes all these years is directly related to their acquisition of the Doyers from News Corp. If memory serves me right, News Corp financed the deal themselves by loaning McCourt the money & using the McCourt’s South Boston real estate holdings as part of the collateral. But shortly afterwards, News Corp allowed the McCourts to retire a significant portion of that acquisition debt in exchange for the titles to those Boston properties in 2004. The McCourts basis in the property was probably greater than the prevailing market value that year, which triggered the substantial net operating loss that’s helped keep them out of taxes since. The value of the team has increased significantly since McCourt took over, allowing him to borrow millions against the franchise’s equity, none of which is taxable. Obviously their not paying any income taxes sounds like shit from a PR standpoint, and as much as I enjoy making fun of the McCourts, I really can’t fault them on this one.
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 24, 2010 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Correction
If memory serves me right, News Corp financed the deal themselves by loaning McCourt the money & using the McCourt’s South Boston real estate holdings as part of the collateral. But shortly afterwards, News Corp allowed the McCourts to retire a significant portion of that acquisition debt in exchange for the titles to those Boston properties in 2004.
News Corp didn’t “allow the McCourts to retire” the debt associated with the note News Corp was carrying. News Corp would have preferred the money.
McCourt defaulted on the note, and News Corp foreclosed on the land held as collateral.
I am certain the last thing News Corp wanted was Boston property to have to deal with, since land isn’t a core holding of the company.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 24, 2010 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
Normally I'm lazier than GA when it comes to researching stuff...
but it was definitely a sale to News Corp and not a default — from the Boston Globe:
“Landowner Frank H. McCourt Jr. is selling the 24 acres he owns on the South Boston Waterfront to pay off a loan he took out two years ago to buy the Los Angeles Dodgers, a spokesman for the buyer said yesterday.
As of next month, McCourt was required to pay News Corp. $125 million for loans he signed with the company to fund his purchase of the Dodgers, plus about $20 million in interest. He backed those loans up with his South Boston land.
A McCourt associate briefed on the sale agreement said that when the sale takes place, “This ends all the obligations McCourt had to News Corp. regarding the purchase of the Dodgers.”
http://www.seaportalliance.org/SAND/Archive/060114mccourt.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oddly enough, News Corp actually made some decent $$$ off of ol’ Frank on this deal and later sold that land they got from him for $145 million at a nice profit:
“Media conglomerate News Corporation said on Thursday it has sold its land in Boston, Massachusetts, to Morgan Stanley Real Estate and Gale International for about $200 million in cash.
News Corporation purchased the land in March 2006 from real estate developer Frank McCourt, who had purchased the Los Angeles Dodgers Major League Baseball team from News Corp"
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=59839&rss=yes
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 24, 2010 4:34 PM PST up reply actions
Mmmmmm...no
That story in the Globe is basically a rip-and-read from the PR wire.
Remember, News Corp vouched for McCourt in order to get the other owners to approve the sale. It wanted out of owning the Dodgers with the same passion that Disney wanted to dump the Angels—News Corp had bought the team for a specific purpose, the mission was accomplished (checkmating Disney) and now it wanted out of baseball in the worst way. McCourt was willing to play the role of well-heeled owner, even if News Corp had to finance a large portion of the selling price. The last thing the company would do at this point is characterize the transaction for what it was: A foreclosure on an unpaid transaction.
Notice how the price of the sale magically equalled the amount of money McCourt owned News Corp. This was 20-something acres of waterfront property in South Boston harbor, and McCourt long had plans to build a mixed zoning housing/retail/entertainment complex there, and had been going through the arduous rezoning process in Boston. He had for some time publicly valued that acreage at $200M, which—zut alors!—happened to be the price Fox Entertainment flipped it for about 18 months later.
McCourt took a loss in “selling” one of his prize jewel properties to satisfy a note that he had defaulted upon. The $55M is probably a “loss” that the McCourts are using to defray current taxable income.
But News Corp gave him an out in the way it was handled with the local media, in characterizing it as a sale. If McCourt’s balls had been the collateral, the story would have read how Fox Entertainment had assisted McCourt in attaining a lifelong goal of singing castrati in the Vienna Boys Choir. Make no mistake, though—it was a foreclosure.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 25, 2010 5:06 AM PST up reply actions
I think our differences here are mostly just semantic
Reading in between the lines of the Boston Globe story, I agree it’s not hard to conclude that McCourt probably didn’t have the money needed to retire the note and that a bargain sale was orchestrated to save his reputation from being sullied had he actually defaulted on the note.
The land was obviously worth far more than the $145 million of cancelled debt. Even the $200 million that News Corp received from Morgan Stanley may still have been much less than what it was actually worth, judging from the speed of the sale and from the fact that a media conglomerate would have neither the interest nor expertise to hold & operate commercial real estate. I guess the $64 question (or $55 million in this case) here is if Frank knew he was not going able to raise the $145 million needed to retire his soon to be maturing promissory note, why didn’t he sell the real estate before hitting that crisis point? What compelled him to hold on to the bitter end and lose out on tens of millions when there were clearly potential buyers present?
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 25, 2010 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
My guess
Since the property was held as collateral for the loan, he couldn’t legally sell the land without the consent of the assignee (News Corp) and (just maybe) they didn’t trust the guy. McCourt sells the land, the money becomes instantly fungible, and suddenly News Corp has to sue to get repaid. If they leave things as is, they know where that property is every morning.
Another theory as to why he waited to the bitter end: Pride.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 25, 2010 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't mean to start a discussion on class warfare
My purpose was more along the lines of how Jamie McCourt mused openly that the Dodgers could support inner city sandlots or sign Manny Ramirez, but not do both.
She charges over $300/mo in makeup fees to the team. He charges off personal travel on the Dodger plane to the team. They employ their two sons for a combined $600K/yr, with neither of them working for the team in a full-time capacity (or even a genuine part-time capacity).
Arte looks for ways to build up the brand and support the local community. The McCourts see the Dodgers as their personal ATM and reap over $100M in income or service value from the team over the past 6 years without paying any taxes to the IRS or state of California—all the while, cutting back on community outreach and diminishing the Dodger brand.
Anybody read about the paycut the Dodgers brought on George Genovese, their oldest scout—from $18K to $8K, and his expenses cut from $5K to $2K. Players signed for backloaded deals, top prospects traded so that players can be received in exchange with their salary covered by the other team (anybody think the Dodgers are going to wish they had Carlos Santana back, long after Casey Blake is gone from the roster?). The team is doing whatever it can to make do with a lower budget, while ownership continues to bleed cash from the company.
I don’t begrudge anyone the right to make a buck, and I don’t dispute that the McCourts appear to be doing this legally (since the IRS may not have gotten around to the McCourts yet). What I object to is the crying of poormouth by the two of them—in their addressing the fans and the community, as well as their court filings in the divorce—when they have plundered the franchise for an incredible amount of tax-free gains.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 24, 2010 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think you started an argument about class warfare
You brought up a very valid point.
Your calling out of the McCourts, particularly in this post I’m replying to now, is largely warranted. As it appears, they really have used the Dodgers as their own ATM in an attempt to maintain their standard of living and screw each other over.
Social implications aside, it’s bad for baseball and it’s ruining the Dodgers. As little as I care about our transplant cousins in the Ravine, it’ a sad thing to see what two greedy tools have done to that team and the millions who support it.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Feb 24, 2010 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
That's one thing I'll always eternally thankful to Disney for
when McCourt approached them about buying the Halos & they told Frank to shove it.
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 24, 2010 5:34 PM PST up reply actions
McCourt inquired about the Angels?
Wasn’t he too busy pretending he could buy the Red Sox back then?
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 24, 2010 7:15 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
It didn't get much publicity at the time as Disney didn't take him seriously
He proposed the same moneyless purchase tactic that later worked for News Corp, but Arte stepped up with real cash & McBroke was left out in the cold.
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."
by Quad Fin Rider on Feb 25, 2010 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
My sarcasm doesn't translate well through pixels
I dimly recall he came calling to Disney, but they gave more importance to a guy in Atlanta who dreamed of buying the team, until it became clear that he, like McCourt, was carrying a portfolio of heavily-leveraged properties and had zero liquidity.
"I can't tell people what to think or not to think. Their perceptions are their perceptions. We just feel we've taken a step forward. At the end of the day, we have to play 162 games. Once that happens then we'll be able to evaluate the offseason moves."~Tony Reagins, on the Angels' offseason
by George Kaplan on Feb 25, 2010 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
Integration
Baseball was not major league before Jackie Robinson was promoted to the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947. Equipment is second and expansion third.
Billy Jurges. I purchased a Strat-O-Matic baseball starter set in 1966 that featured the 1922 New York Giants, 1924 Washington Senators, 1927 New York Yankees, 1931 Philadelphia Phillies, 1934 St. Louis Cardinals and 1935 Chicago Cubs. I managed each of those teams more than one hundred games. The number two, three, and four hitters in my usual 1935 Cubs line-up all had last names that began with H: Billy Herman, Stan Hack, and Gabby Hartnett. In 1987 I began running with the Himalayan Hash House Harriers (a drinking club with a running problem < or H4 or 4H for short >) in Kathmandu, Nepal. All Hash House Harrier chapters have at least a H3 or 3H in their abbreviation. My usual starting line-up for the 1935 Chicago Cubs:
LF Augie Galan
2B Billy Herman
3B Stan Hack
C Gabby Hartnett
RF Chuck Klein
CF Frank Demaree
1B Phil Cavaretta
SS Billy Jurges
P Lonnie Warneke
Other starting pitchers: Bill Lee, Larry French, Charlie Root, Tex Carleton
Relief pitchers: Chuck Henshaw, Fabian Kowalik
Reserves: Ken O’Dea (C-1B), Tuck Stainback (OF)
Each of these Strat-O-Matic teams had 20 players on their roster. I named the above 17 players from memory without looking it up. A score of 17 out of 20 is 85%, good only for a B. I am 100% on the starting line-up. Are there any Strat-O-Matic players here at Halos Heaven besides the Rev?
Not Strat-O-Matic, but instead. . .
Played a ton of Statis Pro Baseball in High School (in the mid 80’s)
Really regret selling off all my old games. I’ve played some OOTP, but somehow its not the same with the little cards.
by righteous halo on Feb 24, 2010 11:19 AM PST up reply actions
I disagree.
Baseball most certainly was a major league prior to integration. I agree that it was illegitimate as it arbitrarily excluded players based on skin color (who, somehow, were deemed less worthy than players with only one arm, or players with only one leg, or midgets). But it still had major leage ballplayers in major league competition at human capacities still meaningful compared to today. (For example, humans were throwing 100-mph and hitting 500-foot homers back in the early 1900’s. We are not throwing 150-mph today. We are not hitting 800 foot HR’s today.) This was well before integration.
Integration did not displace the best of the existing major league talent that was competing very well in a sporting enterprise prior to integration. Integration did great things in terms of opportunities for talented black ballplayers, examples for society as a whole, and certainly did improve the quality of baseball. But it did not turn baseball into ‘major league’.
My vote is for equipment.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
"The Book"
I really have to stop reading all this projection garbage because all it does is get me worked up for nothing. Now these bloggers and their commenters are saying Rich Lederer is using “selection bias” for using the PAST SIX YEARS of data? Are you fucking kidding me? Six years is a lifetime in the major leagues, or any industry for that matter. I thought these guys were supposed to be stat geeks? I can’t wait to see what bullshit excuses get thrown out there when they win 90+ games again this season.
The article on the McCourts is ridiculous.
The Times should be ashamed
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
"In your opinion, what has a greater impact on era-based stats?"
Time.
“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”
-Newt’s view holds true in all aspects.
"Sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
WiHaloFan...
…I got a bit sidetracked by the McCourt’s and taxes (see above). Thanks for this post. The discussion on the glove and accompanying photo once again took me back in time.
When I was a wee lad, I used my father’s old glove. It looked a lot like the one in the photo above. I still recall how hard it was to get my fingers in the glove, and how much more difficult it was to catch a ball compared to the gloves my friend’s & older brothers used. At family picnics or neighborhood pick-up games, I would try to use another glove, borrowed from a neighbor or relative while they were at bat. The truth is, I really disliked that damn glove. Among other deficiencies, it was so…old looking.
Now, I wonder whatever happened to it. I’d sure love to get my hands back on that damn thing. I’d display it along with my other baseball memorabilia.
Again, thanks for helping me take a mental walk back through my youth.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Rangers fall after Young gets touchy feely with third base coach
- Tony La Russa vs. Colby Rasmus: Who ya throwing overboard?
- Marlins say they won't honor Bobby Cox during today's game
- We're Going Streaking! Paul Konerko assures us he's not done
- Rejected! Cardinals fan throws back Brandon Phillips' foul ball
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
