Jump to content

Ojo Rojo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1593
  • Joined

Everything posted by Ojo Rojo

  1. And away we gooooooo!!!!
  2. I guess where I'm coming from is that we don't NEED Soto to have a chance to win the WS. I think we have a team right now that is capable of winning it all. Pitching depth is a big part of that. Once LMJ comes back we are going to have seven legit starting pitchers on the roster. For me, I'd rather have the pitching depth, with two starters coming out of the pen, than a big bat in CF. In terms of prospects, I think we need to be turning most or all of our guys expected to make the big leagues in 2022-2024 into more 2025-2027 guys when our core is going to be in deep decline and a lot of others will be gone because their contracts are up.
  3. Like what? @Snake Diggity, what would you give for Soto?
  4. Okay, thanks for the clarification. He's currently making $17M/yr and he's arbitration eligible next year, right? So what would we be looking at through 2025?
  5. We don't play another team with a record currently over .500 until June 21st. That's the next 34 games against teams .500 or worse.
  6. Fuck. That. Leon + Whitley + one of Siri/McCormick/Meyers. I don't think Leon is The Answer at CF. He's a major league player, but probably not a star or difference maker. I'm ready to move on from Whitley. I don't think he's going to amount to shit and if he does with another team, good for them. We have three CFs and we only need two. You can pry Javier and Garcia from my cold dead hands. In any case, Soto would be a half-season/postseason rental, right? He's a free agent after this year. Not sure how wise it would be to spend a big chunk of our spare $35M on him when we could possibly sign Ted and Yordan to long-term deals.
  7. We still rank 28th in the league in BA, though, at .217. I don't know how that number can be right, even with Maldy and Gurriel's current numbers.
  8. Damn it's good to see our hitters getting well, our pitchers kicking ass and the team winning!
  9. We started the 5mg Focalin last Saturday. We waited a little while after we received the scrip because my wife and I were both out of town at different times and we wanted to be together so we could both watch him closely. I told our son that we were giving him medicine for his brain. He already knows and is very open about the fact that he's got something going on with his brain. He's very casual about it and it's not weird at all, which I'm grateful for. I'd like to think it's because my wife and I have been very careful to be casual about it and not act weird or ashamed or distraught or anything when we talk to him about it. Anyway, we went to a restaurant with extended family for lunch and we saw some immediate and strong effects of the medication. He got one of those kid's menus that has activities and shit you can color and whatnot. He focused INTENTLY on that the entire time. It was almost like a dog with a new bone. He didn't want to let it go. I had to take him and his little brother to the bathroom to change their clothes and he took that paper and the crayons into the bathroom and continued working on it up on the counter. So, at least initially, his ability to focus on a task has been tremendously affected by the medication. A downside is that he seems to be more aggro, which is not good. If we ask him to do something like brush his teeth or something that he doesn't want to do, he gets angry and screams instantly. That was kind of normal before, but it seems more severe and constant right now. We're just keeping a close eye on it, getting feedback from his teachers at school, who know what's going on, and then we'll decide if we need to talk to the pediatrician about maybe changing the dosage or medication. Too early to tell right now. He's also started occupational therapy. I'm about to run out to take him to his appointment now. It's only his second appointment so too early to see any effects. The OT and meds are all we're doing right now. We had the option of a group therapy session, but we decided maybe that was too much and we're just sticking with the other things right now. The group seemed to really help him last fall, so maybe if he struggles during the school year again we try to start that up again. We still don't have an answer for school next year. Most likely he's going to go to the public school in our neighborhood. We have no idea if it's going to work or be good for him long or short term. It's just a crapshoot and there's no amount of data or information that is going to make that decision any clearer. We're just going to have to try something and see how it goes then constantly reassess and respond accordingly.
  10. Musgrove is close on some of those numbers, but this has to be a reliever with only 9 IP. *Edited* It's Raley. On Pena and Correa, if Click et al let Carlos go because they knew what they had in Pena, then my hat is off to them.
  11. I read this guy's bio. What, exactly, qualifies him to be a U.S. Congressman? He's good looking and probably has a rich daddy? He's a college dropout. Seems like a major douchebag with bad behavior. Has no appreciable work experience.
  12. Why do they have to keep jacking with the ball? Is it impossible to standardize the thing? Forced manipulation to get numbers up or down sucks for the game and for fans.
  13. That is dicta and would not be controlling if ever such a case came before the court. But it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the makeup of the court.
  14. I'm not enough of a con law scholar to know if there has ever been a case reversing a case reversing a case. In my silver lining example, though, the future case reestablishing the right to legal abortion would be based on an entirely different part of the constitution than Roe. So it wouldn't really be a reversal of a reversal. It would be a whole new thing.
  15. I've been searching for a silver lining to all of this. The one thing I came up with is that many pro-choice advocates and legal scholars never liked Roe, including RBG herself, because they knew that tying legal abortion to the right to privacy was subject to attack. They were right and here we are now. RBG felt, as others did, that a stronger foundation for legal abortion would be based on gender discrimination. Here is an article that explains it a little further: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/us/ruth-bader-ginsburg-roe-v-wade.html My thought was, "Okay, now is the chance to go back and do this the way it should have been done from the beginning. Tie the right to a stronger constitutional basis." Except then I remembered that it doesn't matter how effective the argument, how perfectly the facts of a potential case would line up with constitutional guarantees or anything else other than the makeup of the court. If there is a majority conservative SCOTUS then there will be no legal right to abortion in this country. Period. And it's going to be years before the balance of the court tips.
  16. To prove just how pro life they are, I think they should make this crime eligible for the death penalty.
  17. Or Bill Miller.
  18. Yeah, that video seemed quite purposeful for horseplay.
  19. Agree 100%. And it's not just courts. It's every politician in the country.
  20. If you think about it, getting an appointment to the Supreme Court is really just a contest to see who can most deftly avoid answering the only questions that matter.
  21. Because they wouldn't get the appointment to the bench.
  22. Correct. And that's bullshit. It's the ONE thing we really need to know.
×
×
  • Create New...