Wow...that's simply amazing. Only EIGHT years ago, people were scared of 80mil!?! I guess I didn't realize few years ago the salaries of the top teams were that low. Just...wow.

http://me.woot.net
It's such a joy to read well-written prose. I spend so much time reading the dreck on the internet (with forums being the lowest of the low, a car accident away from which I cannot tear my eyes) that I often forget what it's like to read something which not only lacks spelling and grammar errors, but which also flows well, is well-researched and makes its point well.

(No slight on my fellow bauxites and authors intended, of course.)

Hey grammar boy, "Internet" should have been capitalized. (Though I was impressed with your use of "not only ... but also ...")

That quote about the $80 million payroll is worth about $200 million.

Oooh ooh, I've got one too! There should be a comma following "well-researched"!

The issue is far from settled:

Words Associated withe the Internet

"There is considerable debate, still, about how to capitalize words associated with the Internet. Most dictionaries are capitalizing Internet, Web, and associated words such as World Wide Web (usually shortened to Web), Web page, Web site, etc., but the publications of some corporations, such as Microsoft, seem to be leaning away from such capitalization. The Yale Style Manual recommends capitalization. The words e-mail and online are not capitalized. The Guide to Grammar and Writing is a monument to inconsistency on this issue."

Jonny German obviously a proponent of the 'serial comma'.

http://me.woot.net
Don't you worry, there will be plenty for you to complain about when I start tearing Aaron Gleeman a new one for not knowing the difference between "amount" and "number."

I'm sure he's quaking in his boots, Joe. May I suggest getting over yourself?

Yeah, the debate about the new computer words is a fun one. For a no-nonsense style guide for the information age, I recommend Bill Walsh's (no not the ex-49er guru; this one is a copy editor for the Washington Post) Lapsing Into A Comma. At its best, it presents compelling arguments why something like "e-mail" should be hyphenated. At its worst, it's a tremendously fun book to read.

And Craig: may I suggest that Joe was kidding? May I further suggest that you too were probably kidding? May I further further suggest that if you were not kidding that you too should get over yourself? May I further further further suggest that if you were kidding but I thought you were not kidding that I should get over myself? And may I finally suggest that I should just (mercifully) shut up?

If any of the above were kidding - here, use this ;-) or :-).

;-)

On Internet vs internet, the latter is a common noun (not used much anymore) meaning an interconnected network of networks, and the former is the specific network that we're all familiar with. More here.

On Bud Selig, it's sort of pathetic that he's spent all those years and all that effort trying to get a larger and larger chunk of what appears to be a rather small pie (offering at one point 22% equity for only $6M?). If he had just taken the money and put it in the S&P500 way back when, he would probably be 10 times richer at least. As an added bonus, he wouldn't be the subject of near universal loathing.

I wasn't kidding. I was just being a grumpy bitch.

Sorry Joe.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1761707
Hijack, sort of (Selig has got his fingerprints all over the steroid mess).

Today, Curt Schilling uttered the first intelligent words on either side of the "steroid war". COMN.

That's fine, but I don't trust Schilling either. I think he's got a bit of the conspiracy theorist in him, a bit of subjectivist, a loose grip of reality. Witness: the throttling of a QuesTec camera with a perfectly good pitching hand.

That's fine, but I don't trust Schilling either. I think he's got a bit of the conspiracy theorist in him, a bit of subjectivist, a loose grip of reality. Witness: the throttling of a QuesTec camera with a perfectly good pitching hand


You doth protest too much.

Schilling is rightly pissed about the "anonymous" test samples from 2003 having names attached to them. It's evidence that the owners cannot be trusted with something as sensitive as this. Schilling even suggested a perfectly reasonable alternative.

As far as the Questec camera destruction is concerned, it's logical that a pitcher with good control won't like a machine that squeezes the strike zone on him. AFAIK, umps are supposed to establish a strike zone early in the game, and then be consistent throughout the game. I think Questec interferes with that, which is why the umps (and many pitchers) hate it.

AFAIK, umps are supposed to establish a strike zone early in the game, and then be consistent throughout the game.

Well, that's what happens, but that's not really what's supposed to happen. What's supposed to happen is that the strike zone is the strike zone, period. And some umpires and pitchers are having trouble adjusting to this. Not that Questec is necessarily the perfect way to get from one to the other.

Well, that's what happens, but that's not really what's supposed to happen. What's supposed to happen is that the strike zone is the strike zone, period. And some umpires and pitchers are having trouble adjusting to this. Not that Questec is necessarily the perfect way to get from one to the other.

I think you're missing my point Matt. Check out this article.

"If I try to throw a pitch in a certain location and I make my pitch, it should be a strike. The game's been going on over 100 years and it's been a pretty good game. This machine changes it."

Is this a good change or a bad change? I'm not entirely convinced it's good...

Okay, I read the article, and I don't feel any need to amend my statement.