Huh. Just read that Nick Sloan is the owner of the newspaper too. Guess you can write this kind of stuff when you don't have anyone around to tell you that you're full of baloney.

Newspaper is a misnomer. The Kansan used to be a newspaper. It went under, and re-emerged as web only.

Then, they should immediately take those eight prospects and trade them for 24 prospects!

The Royals could've been contenders in a year or two if someone other than Drayton took over the GMing.

My dad gave me one dollar bill 'Cause I'm his smartest son, And I swapped it for two shiny quarters 'Cause two is more than one! And then I took the quarters And traded them to Lou For three dimes -- I guess he don't know That three is more than two!

A Shel Silverstein quote! A BTF first?

A Shel Silverstein quote! A BTF first?

"Maybe someday you can go to Detroit" must have reared its head somewhere along the line.

M is for MONEY


Mommy and daddy always fight

about money.

Money is the root of all evil.

See the money. The money is green.

The money is in mommy's purse.

Take the bad bad money

Out of the purse

And send it to

P.O. Box 42, St. Louis, Missouri.

Then mommy and daddy will be happy.

Money is the root of all evil.

No one ever gets that quote right. "The desire/love of money is the root of all evil".

If you ever find yourself in need
You can submit your request in writing
And this is what you do
Send in a self addressed stamped envelope
To PO Box 900
Los Angeles
California
90212
And I will fill your prescription with some degree of accuracy
And then I'll send it back to you
And then I'll send it back to you
And then I'll send it back to you
Yeah!

It doesn't sound ridiculous to me that a Haren type trade would benefit the Royals.

Trading off stars for prospects always sounds good in theory, but it sure didn't pay off with Beltran. Or Dye, or Damon. Everybody knows you're trading from weakness, and that affects the quality of the offers you get.

In theory, a fair package should have a reasonable probability of being better than having Greinke for two more years. What would that even look like? The Nationals giving up Strassburg?

A Shel Silverstein quote! A BTF first?

I bet somebody has quoted "A Boy Named Sue" at some point.

the Royals need to reestablish their reputation as a legitimate major league team first, so keeping Zach Grienke would probably help that out.

I bet somebody has quoted "A Boy Named Sue" at some point.

Perhaps, but they probably thought they were quoting Johnny Cash.

In theory, a fair package should have a reasonable probability of being better than having Greinke for two more years. What would that even look like? The Nationals giving up Strassburg?

Strasburg would be a start, but he wouldn't be worth Greinke by himself.

I can't see a trade for Greinke happening. In order to make it worthwhile for the Royals, they'd need to get multiple major-league ready, pre-arb players in addition to multiple "A"/"B" prospects, and if a team had all of that, why wouldn't they just keep it?

I could see trading Soria for the right package, but they have to keep Greinke.

There are too many kids in this tub.
There are too many elbows to scrub.
I just washed a behind that I'm sure wasn't mine.
There are too many kids in this tub.

Probably not too many people know of Silversteins career as a Nashville songwriter.

he's in their hof.

Well the preacher kept right on saying
That all I had to do was send ten dollars
to the church of the Sacred Bleeding Heart of Jesus
Located somewhere in Los Angeles, California
And next week they'd say my prayer on the radio
And all my dreams would come true
So I did...

Soria should be dealt, and I love Soria. Closers are just overrated. The only problem is that closers don't typically bring in a great haul.

I can't imagine any team would even offer a good enough package to make trading Greinke work. You'd have to deplete a good farm system, and I can't see any of the teams with good farm systems willing to do that in this economy.

Teams are hoarding prospects more than ever it seems. I don't disagree with the point that the Royals should look to start over with young talent, but I think its easier said than done.

No one ever gets that quote right. "The desire/love of money is the root of all evil".

I didn't know this.

Originates in the Bible, Timothy 6:10 (King James Version):

For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Is the part after the colon really necessary?

So couldn't this be like the Herschel Walker trade that resurrected the Cowboys?

Is the part after the colon really necessary?

Of course. Otherwise, you'll end up with an impacted bowel, a rupture and, eventually, septicemia.

So couldn't this be like the Herschel Walker trade that resurrected the Cowboys?


Sure. But that didn't work out very well for the Vikings did it? Which is why you rarely see such big deals anymore.

that verse is just religion pointing Its finger away from itself..

It is kind of fun to think about what the Rays might be able to do for the next couple of years if they added Greinke and Soria.

What happened to the rumors about Soria starting? If you trade him now, I'm assuming the best you can do is something like the Sherrill trade.

Papelbon, Kelly, Buchholz, Kalish, and a couple guys from someone else's system after I flip Soria... am I getting close?

While Cloony stood in the circus tent,
With his head drooped low and his shoulders bent.
And he said,"THAT IS NOT WHAT I MEANT -
I'M FUNNY JUST BY ACCIDENT."
And while the world laughed outside.
Cloony the Clown sat down and cried.

The Red Sox may be the only team with the resources to pull off a Greinke trade but would the Royals pay for Papelbon?

Wow.. my hometown paper growing up. I was wondering how that thing could still be in business, until I saw it's just a website now. Run by a fellow Sumner Academy grad... what a small world.

that verse is just religion pointing Its finger away from itself..

So, you think the love of money leads to a lot of good things?

In any case, it's not a generic reliougs point, it's a specific quote from St. Paul, and one of the more accurate quotes in the whole Bible, if you ask me.

It is not having wealth, or being prosperous that corrupts a man. It is the single minded focus on acquiring wealth, at the expense of all other moral goods that is corrosive.

It basically sums up the entire financial crisis, from the corrupt CEOs and investment bankers packaging the junk loans, to the homebuyer who wants a $500,000 house they can't afford with $0 downpayment, to the guy who refinanced his paid up house to buy a boat and a big screen TV.

Rangers -- Scheppers, Saltalamacchia, Perez, Main, Beltre, Moreland

Rays -- Moore, Colome, Brignac, Beckham, Barnese, McGee

There has to be some common ground here, no?

The Red Sox may be the only team with the resources to pull off a Greinke trade but would the Royals pay for Papelbon?

More importantly, why would they want him? He's just an older, more expensive version of Soria.

I'm pretty sure 1000 years of tribulation comes after The Rupture.

One might say that the love of money is just another religion.

One might say that the love of money is just another religion.

Very true. And materialism is one of the most popular religions these days.

the guy who refinanced his paid up house to buy a boat and a big screen TV

That's either a very small house, a very big boat, or Jerry Jones' Jumbotron.

Papelbon, Kelly, Buchholz, Kalish, and a couple guys from someone else's system after I flip Soria... am I getting close?

Not remotely. They need MLB ready and cheap. Papelbon is an absolute non-starter. Soria is as good and cheaper.

I don't think the Sox have near enough talent in the high minors to get close to Greinke, forget about both.

That's either a very small house, a very big boat, or Jerry Jones' Jumbotron.

The average house in a lot of places costs around $100-150,000. You could easily blow a $75,000 HELOC on a new car, new boat and new TV.

32. rombuu Posted: February 09, 2010 at 12:02 PM (#3456856)
Wow.. my hometown paper growing up. I was wondering how that thing could still be in business, until I saw it's just a website now. Run by a fellow Sumner Academy grad... what a small world.

A fellow Dot!

Or you could grow a sense of humor.

Besides, people who own "the average house in a lot of places" aren't usually the ones over-leveraging it for a new yacht with a 106 inch LCD.

The Red Sox may be the only team with the resources to pull off a Greinke trade but would the Royals pay for Papelbon?

Are the Red Sox up against their budget so badly that they need to dump Papelbon off on the Royals?

I'm willing to bet the Red Sox could take on Greinke's salary without having to dump Papelbon.

Setting aside the ridiculousness of this article for a minute, does anyone really want Moore taking two known, excellent commodities and trying to identify their equivalent in prospects?

Actually, I'd like to see it just for the amusement value of it.

Are the Red Sox up against their budget so badly that they need to dump Papelbon off on the Royals?

Probably not, but it's a badly-kept secret that the Red Sox don't want to pay Papelbon what he'll get on the market. Not with Bard around.

Or you could grow a sense of humor.

Mea culpa. Humour and snark are easy to confuse :-)

materialism gets a bad rap - money is not really material, and even the trappings of wealth are more about symbol than substance..heck, even dialectical materialsm is based upon phiosophical idealism.

my objection is to the claim 'root of ALL evil' - it sees the splinter in your eye, but misses the log blocking its own vision - the denial of death.

It's a mistranslation. "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil" is closer to the original meaning.

It's a mistranslation. "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil" is closer to the original meaning.

In college one of my roommates was a very religious, very serious lad, who actually took a class on ancient greek so he could read the "original" New Testament text for himself. His father was a minister- and great believer in the "King James Version is the Only Version, every other version is a Perversion" line of thinking...

He was decent, but he had a few ticks, thought (because he'd been told all his life) that Catholicism was a cult (compared to Protestant Evangelical faiths...)

Well, he'd practice his greek translation on the New Testament (I don't know where he got that text)- translated few of the King James' more notable passages... and discovered that the King James' translators had taken some liberties... to add insult to injury I let him have my Mother's old Douay Bible- written about the same time as King James, but far less eloquent/poetic- but as my distraught (seriously he really was distraught) roommate discovered FAR FAR more accurate...

But he was young and his mind was not yet shut, generally speaking pointing out errors or inconsistencies in religious texts to "true-believers" may be the most maddening and frustrating endeavor imaginable

One might say that the love of money is just another religion.

Very true. And materialism is one of the most popular religions these days.

My mind has been blown by the profundity of your musings. Please, enlighten me further.

my objection is to the claim 'root of ALL evil' - it sees the splinter in your eye, but misses the log blocking its own vision - the denial of death.

Who denies death? It's a pretty big focus in the Catholic Church at least, e.g. the Four Last Things: Death, Judgement, Heaven, Hell.

It's a mistranslation. "The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil" is closer to the original meaning.

That makes sense. Looking at the Douay-Rheims translation which JPWF cites in 50, we have,

10 For the desire of money is the root of all evils; which some coveting have erred from the faith, and have entangled themselves in many sorrows.

Which sounds much more like, "every type of evil".

Who denies death? It's a pretty big focus in the Catholic Church at least, e.g. the Four Last Things: Death, Judgement, Heaven, Hell.

the latter three are denial of the first.

not that's it's not completely natural to deny - the mind rebels at the thought I'll all-too-soon cease to exist..

Man, there are a lot of obnoxious conversations around here today.

The Greek is riza gar pantwn twn kakwn estin h philarguria - there's no definite article before riza, or root. The NRSV translation I think gets closest at the meaning of the Greek - "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

The section in 1 Timothy is discussing the perennial problem of false teachers - or, more directly, folks who would come into the community and demand too much payment for their teaching. The Didache - a first-century Palestinian text that pre-dates 1 Timothy by decades - has a great line on this. It says that if a teacher comes to stay at your home for a night, feed him and let him sleep. On the second night, again feed him and let him sleep. If he comes for a third night, then he is a false prophet. A very clear rule.

The statement in 1 Timothy 6.10 is really a cultural commonplace - it was no more groundbreaking a sentiment when the person claiming to be Paul wrote it around 100 CE than it is now. It's the sort of thing moralists would say as filler. The point of the saying is simply to explain why it's bad for a teacher to demand too much money - if a teacher demands too much payment, it means he's grasping after money and not to be trusted.

(And there's no damn way Paul wrote the Pastorals - that is, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. They reflect a totally different social organization of communities compared to what's reflected in Corinthians, Thessalonians, and Galatians. While we see bits of Pauline texts being quoted quite early in the history of Christianity, no one knows the Pastorals until nearly the middle of the second century.)

^Yay I learned about this in school! Now I feel knowledgeable!

I think Matt's post is interesting. I certainly learned from it. I'll also add to the idea that the "love of money" as a problem is a recurring theme in political and social thought. For instance of Plato's five regime types are divided according to what the dominant love of the soul is and according what part of the soul is allowed to rule

They are, from best to worst:

Aristocracy is associated with the love of the Good and the rule of wisdom.
Timocracy is associated with the love of honour and the rule of spiritedness.
Oligarchy is associated with the love of money and the necessary desires.
Democracy is associated with the love of freedom and the unnecessary desires.
Tyranny is associated with the love of power and sleeping desires.

In the context of this discussion what we think of as the "love of money" is more democratic than oligarchic since what is generally meant by the "love of money" is actually the "love of luxury." A true lover of money is a miser since they love money too much to spend it.

The other interesting recurrence is the problem of teachers accepting money in exchange for their teaching and the implication this has for political responsibility. See for instance Socrates various interactions with the sophists, especially Gorgias.

And finally to bring all threads full circle on BTF you could probably write an entire treatise on sex addiction and the tyrannical soul. The tyrant is the one who is ruled by their sleeping desires. This would involve a tale of the generation shift from the generation of the fifties motivated by a fear of poverty and the sublimation of desire (eros), to their children, who come of age as hippies and think in terms of free love, which transitions to the casual sex of the eighties which thinks in terms of free sex, to the current generation of unruly tyrants that thinks in terms of free porn. In each case the underlying passion is eros but the outcome is different according to the regression of regimes.

So, you think the love of money leads to a lot of good things?

Well, it's the root of capitalism. Now I don't think capitalism is all that but some see it as responsible for freedom and democracy and higher standards of living and improved health and the end of world wars and on and on.

Then, they should immediately take those eight prospects and trade them for 24 prospects!

Billy Beane is that you?

I don't think the Sox have near enough talent in the high minors to get close to Greinke, forget about both.

I don't think the Sox are going to empty the cupboard for a guy with former anxiety issues. Even one who won a Cy Young.

always look forward to hearing your take, Gaelen, as a proponent of philosophical idealism.

be interested in you taking up the subject of sleeping desires, though I'd call porn 'sleeping desire' and an interesting analogy to plato's cave, mistaking the electronic shadow of women for women themselves.

though those Greeks didn't really have much use for women at all.

Vrhovnik Posted: February 09, 2010 at 12:37 PM (#3456903)

32. rombuu Posted: February 09, 2010 at 12:02 PM (#3456856)
Wow.. my hometown paper growing up. I was wondering how that thing could still be in business, until I saw it's just a website now. Run by a fellow Sumner Academy grad... what a small world.

A fellow Dot!

Wow, I assumed I was the only 'Dotte guy on BTF. SA class of '86.

You do know which HOFer went to Sumner right?

philosophical speculation is eternal, to say endless.

the body is not.

the latter three are denial of the first.

not that's it's not completely natural to deny - the mind rebels at the thought I'll all-too-soon cease to exist..

I don't see how you can be so sure about that. All believers have doubts, how can a non-believer be certain that death is the end? If modern science has taught us anything, it's that we don't know a lot more than we know.

In any case, to reference Pascal, if there really is nothing after death, what have I lost? My religion doesn't direct me to do anything bad, unless you consider not indulging in vices to be "bad". That's the whole thrust of natural law philosophy/theology. The moral law is good in and of itself, even without reference to God.

I can be absolutely certain that everything I think of as me will cease to be with my death, particularly because all relational/reference points will be lost..

if your actions are performed for illusory reasons, are you really living? I am not trying to convince you to exchange your beliefs for a different set of beliefs, but just inviting you to see how belief in an afterlife can make you less awake and alive now. I'm not really any better, I feel like I'm just barely waking up even now..but enough to see how my belief systems limit the only life I'll ever have..not to go out and revel in 'vice' (though revelation can be quite enjoyable if the body's energies can be fully felt) but to appreciate to the greatest degree my relationships with other people..and that has made me more responsible, not less, when it comes to not doing others harm..there's no place for revenge, definitely no 'kill 'em all and let god sort it out'.

it's not really religion I find fault with, but all philosophical/belief systems that deny the primacy of corporeal reality. Atheism is the same, esp when aligned with philosophical/political ideology like Marxism.

honestly, this is not so much an intellectual issue as an emotional one..

'in the fire of dying, philosophies melt like ice cubes'