XZero771679666304

Actually, they do. despite my admonitions, the wife still drinks diet pop (mostly Diet Dr. Pepper), and according to the list of ingredients, it contains aspartame. I'm pretty sure all the other major diet sodas do as well. EDIT: A cursory look shows Diet Dr. Pepper, Diet Pepsi, the majority of Diet Coke and Diet Dew all still contain aspartame. Your right, my apologies. Either way, it's still extremely debatable if it is indeed harmful. I'm sure some studies say it's not harmful, while others do, but a quick scan of Wikipedia found this: (I assumed the NCI would have no hidden agenda) And while they may not help you lose weight, you certainly aren't gaining weight such as with regular soft drinks. I guess basically what I am getting at is that it may or may not be harmful, but nowadays what isn't? Some people believe that their could be a link between cancer and cell phone antennas. Hell, who knows, it's probably bad to use the "crisping sleeve" to cook my hot pocket for lunch too. The problem with trying to draw a correlation between aspartame and cases of cancer is that the evidence is fairly anecdotal. Unless you actually put together a long term, controlled experiment using human subjects (which has not been done, as far as I know), you are basing your findings on fairly flimsy evidence. Often you have to get decades out before you see illnesses that are caused by such factors. In actual lab tests (with rats), the results have been fairly conclusive. IIRC, decades ago the notion that cigarettes caused cancer was met with skepticism, and reports were published discounting the notion, mostly based on the same sort of anecdotal evidence. And if I were you, I would be far more afraid of prolonged cell phone usage than crisping sleeves (though hot pockets will make you fat). There is truth there.

IIRC, Meph predicted Carlos would have an ERA over 4 in 2008, so I am guessing he some sort of bad trend.

True, but the truth is the diet stuff is worse for you, and it really doesn't help you lose weight, either.

Actually, they do. despite my admonitions, the wife still drinks diet pop (mostly Diet Dr. Pepper), and according to the list of ingredients, it contains aspartame. I'm pretty sure all the other major diet sodas do as well. EDIT: A cursory look shows Diet Dr. Pepper, Diet Pepsi, the majority of Diet Coke and Diet Dew all still contain aspartame.

I would say a realistic offer would be: Cedeno, Castillo, Vitters, Ceda, Marshall and maybe Veal. Being that the only incentive to trade Roy at this point would be salary relief, I don't see them taking Marquis. But again, I would ask for Soto if I were Ricciardi. It's a pipe dream anyway. As for other NL central teams, I don't think the Cards have enough. Rasmus would be a good start, but they really don't have much else to offer. Milwaukee would likely have to surrender Hardy and Gamel, plus others. I imagine they'd want Gallardo, or Parra at the very least. They could get it done, and would have a replacement ace for the next couple years as well as a great shot at a WS title this year, but it would leave their system in a shambles. Then again, all the picks they'll get when Sheets and CC leave would mitigate the loss.

I beg to differ. Roy is definately worth 5-7 players HANDS DOWN. is Roy better than Rich Harden, who only cost 4 players (and Chad Gaudin came in the same deal?) Think about it dude Yes, Roy Halladay is much better than Rich Harden, he throws complete games like their going out of style. I'm not sure his ability to dominate is higher, but the man devours innings while doing it. He's certainly more valuable than Rich Harden because of efficiency and durability. That's not even mentioning he's signed for two more years.

I don't know. It wouldn't be unprecedented, and what the Cubs lack in quality prospects, they'd have to make up in quantity. Especially since Toronto doesn't have a pressing need or incentive to trade Roy, which really bolsters their bargaining position. Realistically, if I am Ricciardi and the Cubs approach me about Halladay, the first name I ask for in return is Soto, and then I move on to the prospects. If not Soto, then Castillo and an increased number of top prospects. I can't see Halladay being moved anywhere without a very good, young ML player or multiple ML ready prospects going back in return. He's signed for multiple years at below market value. Honestly, I don't know why J.P. would deal him, unless he was just blown away by an offer.

Somebody needs to tell the Cubs its not 2001.

I couldn't see the first one, and living in NM, the Chicago telecast is going to be blacked out on EI. I better get to at least see the Arizona telecast, or I am going to be peeved.

If one team has to win, go Cards.

You should try Diet Dr. Pepper if you're not wild about Diet Coke. I buy it by the case, but I work at a Coca-cola warehouse so I get 24 - 20 oz. drinks for $6.25. I also like Coke Zero better than Diet Coke. Diet drinks are bad for you.

Really? I wouldn't have guessed.

Who? Jon Lieber, relief pitcher- Chicago Cubs I know who he is, Lou doesn't seem to, though.

Who?

all the riff-raff lives in Delaware County, the yokels live in Clayton County I prefer to think of you Delaware County folk as a yokel-riff raff hybrid. I try to generalize as much as possible. I never lived in Delaware County though. drank a few thousand beers there but never called it home You went to Starmont, that's close enough for me. Don't try and derail my generalizations. To tell you the truth, I don't know exactly where the county lines fall. I just think of the Manchester/Strawberry Point/Backbone area as being the Delaware county area. you'll have to forgive my relative ignorance. What town are you from?

all the riff-raff lives in Delaware County, the yokels live in Clayton County I prefer to think of you Delaware County folk as a yokel-riff raff hybrid. I try to generalize as much as possible.

True, but Blanton is more consistent in his suckage. Burnett ranges from great to awful, and carries the potential of stretches of dominance. This is due to his ability to miss bats.

Jose Oquendo? It probably was, that dude's versatile.

Isn't that a pretty big qualification? Burnett's k/9 is almost double what Blanton's is. He also has an edge in k/bb, OPS against and gb/fb. but aside from all the things that are different, they're pretty much the same I was getting around to that in my own circuitous way

I'm in North Liberty but grew up in that area. most of my family went/goes to Starmont and I have several relatives that are good friends of his. I played softball against him and his dad for a few years as well, but I haven't seen either in probably 3 years had many a friend in the strawberry area his mom used to work with me in manchester, the family on both sides definitely has baseball blood in cedar falls now, did you go to starmont? sure did, class of 92 This explains a lot it sure does It just proves my theory that nothing good ever came out of the Delaware County area. (yes, I am kidding...I think) I used to have some acquaintances from that area that I liked to razz about being yokels

Isn't that a pretty big qualification? Burnett's k/9 is almost double what Blanton's is. He also has an edge in k/bb, OPS against and gb/fb.

I'm in North Liberty but grew up in that area. most of my family went/goes to Starmont and I have several relatives that are good friends of his. I played softball against him and his dad for a few years as well, but I haven't seen either in probably 3 years had many a friend in the strawberry area his mom used to work with me in manchester, the family on both sides definitely has baseball blood in cedar falls now, did you go to starmont? sure did, class of 92 This explains a lot

He's a ground ball pitcher, though not extremely so. It shouldn't hurt him too much, though he hasn't been very good in Oakland this year. Add in the pitcher batting, and he should be about the same, IMO.

I agree, to a point. I genuinely enjoyed going to ballgames from the age of about 7-8 on. There is no way I would take an infant to a big sporting event.

Plus, we've all seen foul balls deflected after hitting a few upstretched bare hands. I really don't want to be in the path of a hard hit ball after it was deflected by a guy two rows in front of me, but if I am in the path I definitely want a glove. IMO, if you're reasonably facile with a glove and you are sitting along the foul lines, I see nothing wrong or embarrassing at all in bringing it. You are decreasing the risk to you and those around/behind you who might not be paying enough attention, or do not want to deal with a foul ball coming their way. After it's deflected, it's not as dangerous. I want the glove for the balls that are smoked right at me. If someone else wants to be a tough guy and barehand screamers, that's their prerogative. If I am in the bleachers or way up in the terrace or mezz, I don't bring one. I am talking about right down the lines, from the dugout up. if you don't care about looking like a dork and are afraid of getting hurt, why don't you take a freaking shield or something that would actually be useful? if i were legitimately frightened about my safety because i had such awesome seats, a stupid glove would not be first on my list of things i would bring to protect myself. Um, because a glove serves that purpose, and is a lot more practical than a freaking shield, maybe. If I am there, I will be paying attention, and common sense tells you that it's a lot less painful to catch screaming liners with a glove than with a bare hand. I don't know about you, but I do not consider anyone who brings a glove to a game to be a dork (unless they're in the upper deck or 20 rows deep in the bleachers). Maybe it's an insecurity thing.