Tracer Bullet

Kuelchy enters the draft.

Should we be getting ecstatic over deals every year? Since the ARam trade I think I've been ecstatic over two trades: Aramis/Lofton and Nomar. I was borderline ecstatic on the Marshall trade when I found out Torreyes and Sappelt were included. I might be forgetting one or two, but I don't often get ecstatic over trades. This isn't a criticism of the trade or of Theo/Jed, I simply don't see Rizzo as being such a great talent that I'll get ecstatic over giving up a potential TOR pitcher with huge injury risk for him. It's a very good, smart trade, but not one that gets me over the top ecstatic. Every year? Not likely (though Theo is 1/1). It's not every year that we acquire another team's #1 prospect that fills a huge need, is 22, mashed AAA, and is under control for 6 years, by giving up much less many than expected. I like Cashner, though I tend to think his shot at being a great SP isn't terribly high and he's a couple years away from being a SP at all. So while SD may view this as a win bc they have other young 1b at their disposal, I think we got exactly the kind of player we need. So I'm ecstatic.

Good point. The cubs paid off the CPD shortly after Theo took over (or would this be Crane's area?). If so, we should turn the nsbb keys over to wsr.

Because I really like Cashner's upside potential, despite his significant injury risk. I think it's a very good trade, but one where we certainly gave up a very good pitcher in the process. There's nothing wrong with that, but for me to be ecstatic over a trade I need to feel like it was a complete steal. I don't feel that way - more that it was a very good trade for both sides. Trading from an area of relative depth to one of dire need and getting the best player in the deal isn't enough for you to be ecstatic? I can understand not being ecstatic if you're down on Rizzo. But those ARam deals aren't going to come along every year.

You'd like to think that if the accusation was credible they would have at least questioned him then. I can't believe they wouldn't know when he was back in the US if they wanted to. Of course, the Chicago PD doesn't have the most glowing reputation, so the failure to act quickly doesn't totally eliminate the possibility that this is credible.

the law doesn't distinguish much between using force and knowing someone can't consent: http://law.onecle.com/illinois/720ilcs5/12-13.html http://law.onecle.com/illinois/720ilcs5/12-15.html (and this lesser charge is still a class 4 felony if she was passed out...) Maybe you missed the part where I said I know drunk can't consent. But in the law you reference, 1 requires force or threatened force, 2 requires Castro to know that the victim couldn't consent. If he's so drunk, he doesn't remember much of the evening either, what did he know? Hey the law can be pretty strict on this point and maybe it should be. But I've struggled with 2 totally smashed people having sex and the guy being a rapist. Maybe I'm alone in that. Maybe every guy here that's had sex with a drunk woman is comfortable in the knowledge that he's a rapist. I doubt that though. I have a hard time believing he gets charged with something unless he was pretty sober or there was force involved. Anything else and this looks a lot more like a mutual mistake than a crime. i didn’t miss anything, but (despite your parenthetical) you said “I don't recall seeing anything about force” as if this is somehow determinative of whether we're a "long way" from rape. my point is that if he did understand that she was passed out, it’s treated the same as if he had used force. yes, maybe she had magical powers that made her act totally normal while blacked out. or maybe he was ridiculously, ridiculously drunk and somehow couldn’t tell that she was as well. but i think there is maybe an even greater likelihood that he was coherent enough to tell whether she was in a state to consent. if so, he committed a serious crime (and from what you have posted, I think you agree on this). i hope he didn’t, but it’s not like it's some crazy notion. Lack of force + lack of knowledge about how coherent he was + lack of knowledge about what activities they were engaged in + lack of knowledge of whether she was passed out during activities or just forgot some events = a long way from rape. I didn't imply in any way that lack of force alone is determinative of rape. Nor have I implied that rape isn't a possibility. What's the bold based on?

See, I think this all started when you said this. And then were indignant that mbc (maybe others) didn't share your strange view. I don't view Castro any differently today than I did yesterday. Those 3 paragraphs aren't enough to sway my opinion yet. And saying some public figure might be a rapist is a pretty powerful statement. I don't think I'm in the minority there at all.

Just to address this. I'm not saying there's no way it's true. I'm saying it's too early to put the "might be a rapist" tag on. We could change your name to Might Be A Rapist and that would be about as appropriate. We have one small slice of one side of a story from 4 months ago. And what we have isn't even enough to know whether they had sex or if they both passed out and she woke up with his hand on her boob.

I don't think my response is strange. I think jumping from what we know to saying Castro might be a rapist (as opposed to any other player might be a rapist) is strange. He might be a rapist. You might be a rapist too. So might I (well, I'm obviously not bc I know I'm not but you get the point). I tend to agree with mbc that the chance that Castro is a rapist is not significantly higher based on what we know today v what we knew yesterday. Look, if this girl passed out and he was relatively sober and had sex with her or if he threatened or used force than he's a despicable human being and I hope he's jailed for the better part of his life (which won't happen). But I'd also say that if Castro is a mass murderer, he should be jailed forever and I'm not sure the likelihood of him being the former is that much higher than of him being the latter, at least until we know a hell of a lot more than we do.

the law doesn't distinguish much between using force and knowing someone can't consent: http://law.onecle.com/illinois/720ilcs5/12-13.html http://law.onecle.com/illinois/720ilcs5/12-15.html (and this lesser charge is still a class 4 felony if she was passed out...) Maybe you missed the part where I said I know drunk can't consent. But in the law you reference, 1 requires force or threatened force, 2 requires Castro to know that the victim couldn't consent. If he's so drunk, he doesn't remember much of the evening either, what did he know? Hey the law can be pretty strict on this point and maybe it should be. But I've struggled with 2 totally smashed people having sex and the guy being a rapist. Maybe I'm alone in that. Maybe every guy here that's had sex with a drunk woman is comfortable in the knowledge that he's a rapist. I doubt that though. I have a hard time believing he gets charged with something unless he was pretty sober or there was force involved. Anything else and this looks a lot more like a mutual mistake than a crime.

i don't want to argue about this or have a back and forth, but if he had sex with this person without her consent, he is a rapist (and a lot of other very bad things and i hope something terrible happens to him). i don't care about any spectrum or the use of force or any of that. and yes, where he falls between totally innocent and rape is far from known, but this all started when you complained that someone said starlin "might be" a rapist. holy god do i ever hope he didn't do this, but there's not much reason to think you can say "oh, don't even say that he might be a rapist, there's no way that's true." So 2 people are so trashed that they don't know what they're doing. They begin having sex, while neither loses consciousness, the woman doesn't remember part of the night...he's a rapist. Do I have that right? Who knows. I suppose its possible that he's a sexual predator. Boy his personality doesn't seem to mesh with that, but it's possible. It's also possible this girl was drunk and woke up in the morning regretting having had sex with a baseball player. There's also a lot of other scenarios. I'm just not willing to go from here to alleged rapist yet, esp since the allegation isn't rape.

Slow down there champ. We're a helluva long way from rapist. Notice I said wouldn't and might be. I obviously wasn't saying he's a rapist, if you actually read what I wrote. All of this is conjecture at this point, I just thought the notion that a fan only cares about legal ramifications to be a bit callous, that's all. I did read what you wrote. And we're a long way from rapist. Even if Castro is charged with something or even convicted of something, we're a long way from rape. So for a fan to take a wait and see approach before reacting seems reasonable. ? what incorrect definition of rape are you using? how are we are long ways from rape? if he did what he has been accused of, he's a rapist. What exactly is he being accused of? The story I read was they were drunk together, the girl allegedly blacked out, came to early in the morning while they were having sex, objected and left. I don't recall seeing anything about force (and yes, I'm aware that drunk can't consent). We're somewhere on the sexual assault spectrum. Where he falls between totally innocent and rape is far from known.

Slow down there champ. We're a helluva long way from rapist. Notice I said wouldn't and might be. I obviously wasn't saying he's a rapist, if you actually read what I wrote. All of this is conjecture at this point, I just thought the notion that a fan only cares about legal ramifications to be a bit callous, that's all. I did read what you wrote. And we're a long way from rapist. Even if Castro is charged with something or even convicted of something, we're a long way from rape. So for a fan to take a wait and see approach before reacting seems reasonable.

Slow down there champ. We're a helluva long way from rapist.

Love this.

Sounds like former 4/5 star (depending on service) WR Justin McKay is transferring to KU too. Weis is going to bring in every guy he ever recruited that got passed on their respective depth chart and take the fka big 12 by storm.

Eifert publicly confirms he's returning to ND.

yeah i'm sure a major league organization is going to give hush money to a possible rape victim. sounds like a solid p.r. move. Hush money would suggest that it would have been given to her before the reports had actually come out. cash settlements are to avoid dragging a case to court when there's a good chance that there won't be a resolution. It's all a part of this wonderful land we call corporate america, and sports franchises don't react much differently when their best and brightest get themselves into trouble. Please stop.

Hey, the last Pats OC to take a CFB HC job turned out marvelous.

Why are you screaming at Wrigley? Theo works at Fenway.

Yes, it's rare for guys like Pujols, Fielder, Wilson and Darvish to all be available to the highest bidder in the same offseason. That was the point of striking while there was a chance, because those guys would fit into this team so well, and there is no guarantee you'll get a better option in 2-3 years. A lack of impact free agents becoming available is hardly an excuse to steer clear of impact free agents when they do become available. I just don't understand this obsession with having the most efficient roster. If Hoyer and his boys are any good at their job they will have plenty of young prospects to exploit on the cheap for several years, you don't have to suck on you way to getting there. You want Pujols contract? Wilson didn't want to sign here - nothing we can so. Darvish I would have liked, but who knows what we actually bid. We may still sign fielder, but I doubt it if it costs what I think it will. Once you miss out on Wilson and esp Darvish, spending for 2012 doesn't make much sense.

So we shouldn't look to FA as the best or only source to improve. Maybe we should acquire assets we can trade for 2013-14.

That point makes sense. In other words, its a problem if you are waiting for impact players to become available via free agency. I'm not sure jersey realizes he made an excellent point against using FA to improve the team. I don't think that is what he meant - he meant once they do become available, if you have the means, you go after them. You're probably right. But his statement is accurate. The best players in their primes are rarely FAs bc the team that has them wants to extend them or trade them.

That point makes sense. In other words, its a problem if you are waiting for impact players to become available via free agency. I'm not sure jersey realizes he made an excellent point against using FA to improve the team.

Why? Because they're mediocre players? Trade a mediocre player whose value ends after 2012 for a slightly better overall asset that's 2012 value is lower but has value beyond that. Turn those players into assets that help in 2013. Again, not rocket science, but giving up players of no value beyond this year can help beyond this year.