TheLeviathan

See this is where you lose me. Right off the bat let me make this clear - morally and intellectually I can make a strong case for gay marriage and fully support it (frankly, I think my case is a better one to get gay marriage cemented than what you typically hear), but we do live in a democracy. We can't just identify some laws and ideas and ban them from the public conscience or the law book simply because we think their source is in religion. That's taking the concept too far. It's making the same mistake the religious people are making by legislating their ideas. To me, free speech exists to give everyone a voice - including voices that dissent or disagree with us. That would include the ability to profess one's faith and the need for the country's laws to reflect that. Religion is always going to infiltrate government at some level because the law is often built on moral ideas and moral ideas often comes from religion. Where the ACLU and others need to draw the line is where the freedom to express one's religion infringes on the rights of another - which is very different than what you said. The two issues you cite are complicated because abortion is an incredibly messy exchange of morals even for people who are "pro-life" and the idea of "rights" in this scenario has always bothered me. Likewise, marriage is a privilege not a right. I think you'd find if you analyze more of the religious ideas you want gone from discourse you'd realize that they too get caught in difficult moral dilemmas. That isn't for the ACLU to decide and when I hear their members say similar things I am very worried.

I'm not sure what your post is saying glunn, but I thank you for the reminder that Lauren Cohan is friggin gorgeous.

I've thought a few times how much Ponder reminds me of T-Jack when it comes to handling pressure. And I've felt the same about a number of the sacks. I have no data on this, but from watching it just feels like 40% of the sacks are bad blitz reads, 40% are Ponder either holding the ball too long or running right at defenders in a collapsing pocket, and 20% are the line actually getting beat. I think the issue downfield isn't even his arm strength. It's his inability to set his feet on throws. The comps to Pennington may need to switch more accurately to Cade McNown if that continues.

Police blotters don't necessarily pick up on clubhouse cancers or bad attitudes. It's certainly fine to take character into consideration as a red flag, the problem is when you make pristine character a necessity that trumps talent as the Twins seem to do.

There are plenty of eye rolling moments, but not the ones you listed. Andrea's characterization this season has been awful. They still are character building more post-death than pre-death. But I don't agree with your complaints. Go back and read the comic - Michonne was a brooding isolationist there as well. Especially if you exclude Tyreese. And that wasn't even in Woodbury where she has reason to be mistrustful. So you're way off base there. As for the Governor, the comic version was never going to work on TV. What they're doing to tweak him to make him plausible in a non-cartoonish way has been really good so far. As Heath Ledger and a few others have taught us - sometimes the best comic book character isn't the outlandish version you see in print, but the monster you make real. We'll see if they can do that here, but the foundation has been well built so far.

Missed blitz pickups has certainly been an issue. The only thing I don't know is how much of that is on Ponder or on Sullivan.

Agreed for the most part. Do you think the line has been worthy of him being skiddish this year? I've thought many sacks were his fault for holding the ball too long or running into defenders rather than staying in the pocket. I've never found a site I like for tracking o-line work, just rely on my eyes which isn't always fair.

I think early on Kirkman said this was the story of Rick and the series would die when he did. Recently I'm pretty sure he changed his tune and insinuated that he's realized this is really the story of Carl, not Rick. Which is interesting. So far everyone they have killed or introduced has been spot-on. The Governor can't be a comic book character to make this worthy of watching. They've taken his twisted side, made it realistic, and done a damn good job doing it. The logic behind the zombie games was a good example.

First - 5 million is not much money. Especially for a starter that is slated to be ready by opening day. Now obviously there are risks associated with that, serious ones, but more than Marcum? Bedard? Josh Johnson? More risk than them? Maybe, but 5M is not some god awful price. Part of the issue here is that you keep insinuating that the market was clearly at a lower rate than what the Cubs paid. Based on what? What comps are you using? You can keep plugging holes in mine, but I've yet to hear you offer your own. Frankly, I don't think you have any - it's a gut thing. Which is fine, but cut the high and mighty act by demanding evidence from me that you don't have for your viewpoint either. It's disingenuous and fallacious. Because 5M is half of what Harden has gotten. Or Sheets got. 5M is what we paid Matt friggin Capps. It's not that much money to gamble on a pretty solid arm. Again, we complain all the time that the Twins don't take low commitment, high risk-high reward opportunities when they have the chance. And they passed on one again. So I find it completely illogical to paint this as such a ridiculous contract. I find it even more illogical when just a few threads over you're advocating an almost identical situation with Yunel Escobar who comes with a boatload of his own risks.

By all means Pseudo give your comps. What I hear is that a solid #2 pitcher with some durability issues going for 5 mil was ridiculous and too risky. Last I checked we have plenty of payroll and no pitchingand this is too risky? If this were any other non Twins arm we would be salivating on this board for that pricetag. The general response on this move is bizarre at best.

If you pay what you had to for the market....why is it crazy or overpaying? I never denied that Baker isn't in the class of Sheets or Webb at full health, but what other pitchers are you using to compare? I hear Colby Lewis but he has plenty of red flags, perhaps more than Baker. (And he's two years older) Every player and their situation is unique, so to suggest that there's some body of evidence that says this was an overpayment is just as flimsy. By all means, post who you are comping him to and I'm sure I could poke similar holes to what you did with Sheets and Webb, but I'd be curious to see it. If people are getting too caught up on overpaying, perhaps you and others shouldn't make it such a central part of your evaluation.

Oh snap! Now ya done it! The Possible Police are going to raid this thread and scold you for pointing out that it could happen and it isn't unrealistic!

What am I shifting. The claim is that they overpaid. Based on what criteria? Ben Sheets was out 2 years and made 10M. Colby Lewis? I could argue pertinent facts in his case make Baker more valuable. I'm not shifting any goalposts, they've been the same the whole time - Baker isn't overpaying on the free agent market when the market says this was the going rate. As was said earlier. Where exactly did you shift them to and then decide to whine about it? Because I've laid out my criteria....what's yours?

You're equivocating. "Possible" does not equal "realistic". People are not suggesting just competent - you can go back and review my post as well if you'd like or check out the blueprints thread yourself. It was ridiculous to think it realistic to do what no team has done before. If you have precedent, by all means post it. If you don't - you are only suggesting what is literally not impossible. You aren't suggesting anything realistic.

Any other fallacies you want to throw out there? The market sets value. What you consider "overpaying" is far more subjective and less valuable as a measure.

By all means cite some examples of when one team has gone out and signed 2-3 of the top 7-10 FA starters in one offseason. Then we'll talk realistic. I don't doubt that the Twins "could" do this - I never said "impossible". I said insane and ridiculous because it was unrealistic. Again, you seem to have missed the point by imprinting your own interpretation. Which then got handed off to Nick to do the same errant interpretation.

Yup, agreed. I was a reader of the graphic novels so dropping wasn't something I was considering, but good god Sophia made it painful to endure for awhile there. This season has sound writing and action - it's been a breath of fresh air from that nonsense on the farm.

Absolutely intentional. It takes a lot of smug to pass Nick. That said, goes back to my point - all the predictions were ridiculous wishlists - not realistic. Just to recap: I suggest the offseason "rebuild to contend" posts were ridiculous and insane because they were unrealistic and wishful, get called out for being too harsh and that most people didn't think that, post just a small sample of a much richer pile of evidence to prove that plenty of people did, then get told all of those things were unrealistic and wishful. Right where I started.

Shall I give you a list of other MLB pitchers that have made 5M despite being injury prone? Hell, we handed Stachy one a bunch of cash the last few years as an immediate example. Brandon Webb got 3M guaranteed plus a **** ton of incentives and he hadn't pitched in two years. Yes Webb was a better pitcher. He also had serious trouble getting healthy. Ben Sheets got 10M after not pitching for two years and the surgery. While the exact circumstances are strange, "overpaying" by 1M what the Twins were offering doesn't exactly support your theory that the Cubs went out of bounds of normal free agency. Baker isn't elite and 5M isn't elite money. It was a slight overpayment at most, certainly nothing to bristle at and start dropping "elite" references around to imply that it was ridiculous.

Back from the dead puns aside......this show has dramatically improved. If you dropped it after the stale second season, pick it back up. It's worth it.

I wasn't arguing with you...I was adding to your argument...or attempting to :-) Ah, yeah I generally appreciate the ACLU but am very bothered by their member politics. I worry about the sustainability of the organization's commendable traits of objectivity.

So, basically you're saying the forum has been without substantive analysis for the last month or more and should be seen as nothing more than a series of 6 year old-esque Santa wishlists that shouldn't be taken seriously? In that case, we're in total agreement - thank you for making my initial point about how ridiculous those hopes were.

I fail to see how this disagrees.

Well....unless you vote for Kang.

Well said. Apparently shoving one's head in the sand and screaming "overpay" is the response this board has decided to take. It sounds like even the Twins were in this ballpark too. Get real, this is FA starting pitching. It doesn't come cheap. Overpay is the name of the game.