Income Inequality Rose Most Under President Clinton - Investors.com

I'm not sure if this one article knocks down the bulk of the OWS'ers basic thesis and arguments one by one. So the Gini coefficient, the best measure of income inequality did worse under Republicans Reagan-Bush-Bush than it has under The Dems Clinton-Obama. If the Repubs are the party of the rich -- and that's the mantra we hear screeched the most -- then they may need to ask for a refund.

Great read. Of course, you won't see it reported by any of the MSM pundits. There, the truth hurts, even though most of us know that the truth shall set you free. They have never been know to let the facts get in the way of a good story either.

H/T to the Conservative Manifesto blog who sent me a heads up to the story. More food for thought on the Gini coefficient and income inequality from another favorite blogger 'Whiskey and Gunpowder'.

Income Inequality Rose Most Under President Clinton - Investors.com: "Income Inequality Rose Most Under President Clinton

By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 11/03/2011 08:05 AM ET

In his weekend radio address, President Obama decried that "over the past three decades, the middle class has lost ground while the wealthiest few have become even wealthier." Although he was trying to leverage the Occupy Wall Street movement, the income gap has been a longstanding concern of his."

During the 2008 campaign, Obama said, "The project of the next president is figuring out how do you create bottom-up economic growth, as opposed to the trickle-down economic growth that George Bush has been so enamored with."

But it turns out that the rich actually got poorer under President Bush, and the income gap has been climbing under Obama.

What's more, the biggest increase in income inequality over the past three decades took place when Democrat Bill Clinton was in the White House.

The wealthiest 5% of U.S. households saw incomes fall 7% after inflation in Bush's eight years in office, according to an IBD analysis of Census Bureau data. A widely used household income inequality measure, the Gini index, was essentially flat over that span. Another inequality gauge, the Theil index, showed a decline.

In contrast, the Gini index rose — slightly — in Obama's first two years. Another Census measure of inequality shows it's climbed 5.7% since he took office.

Meanwhile, during Clinton's eight years, the wealthiest 5% of American households saw their incomes jump 45% vs. 26% under Reagan. The Gini index shot up 6.7% under Clinton, more than any other president since 1980.

To the extent that income inequality is a problem, it's not clear what can be done to resolve it. Among the contributing factors:

Economic growth. Strong economic growth, rising stock prices and household income inequality tend to go hand in hand.

Technology. Tech advances have put a premium on skilled labor, according to a Congressional Budget Office report . Because the pool of skilled workers hasn't grown as much as demand, their wages have climbed faster.

Free trade and immigration. Cheap labor abroad and an influx in low-skilled immigrants can depress wages at the bottom, according to the CBO.

Women in the workforce. As the CBO put it, "an increase in the earnings of women could boost inequality by raising the income of couples relative to that of households headed by single people."

Tax policy changes don't explain the widening income gap. The CBO found that, by one measure, "the federal tax system as a whole is about as progressive in 2007 as it was in 1979."

-----
From the Conservative Manifesto blog:

---

Actually... the rich got poorer under Bush (and richer under both Clinton and Obama) Posted: 07 Nov 2011 08:07 AM PST In a time of rampant (not to mention criminal) Occupy mobs, this should be a bubble burster. The wealthiest 5% of U.S. households saw incomes fall 7% after inflation in Bush's eight years in office, according to an IBD analysis of Census Bureau data. A widely used household income inequality measure, the Gini index, was essentially flat over that span. Another inequality gauge, the Theil index, showed a decline. In contrast, the Gini index rose — slightly — in Obama's first two years. Another Census measure of inequality shows it's climbed 5.7% since he took office. Meanwhile, during Clinton's eight years, the wealthiest 5% of American households saw their incomes jump 45% vs. 26% under Reagan. The Gini index shot up 6.7% under Clinton, more than any other president since 1980. Of all the places the Occupy children have infested, it's a wonder 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. isn't one of them.

----------
From Whiskey and Gunpowder:

The Income Gap Obsession

Nov 8th, 2011 | By Jeffrey Tucker
http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/the-income-gap-obsession/

The word “equality” is being rammed down our throats every day, with special focus on the so-called “income gap.” The presumption is that we should all denounce the gap, work to eliminate it and embrace perfect equality as an ideal.

It’s true that inequality is growing, but the focus on that alone is sheer folly. Equality applies to math equations. You could also use it to describe how the law should be impartial with respect to persons — the traditional use of the term “equality” in the classical liberal literature. But that’s it. Otherwise, an obsession with this topic is very dangerous for a free society.

That’s because the people who invoke equality have no intention of creating the conditions to make it easier for the poor and for middle-income earners to grow rich. Leveling upward is never the goal. Egalitarians want to flatten incomes at the top so that the rich no longer exist. This can’t help anyone but the envious, those who get a kick out of destroying, rather than creating.

As Shikha Dalmia writes, “Income inequality tells us zilch about the only thing that really matters: Are the lives of Americans, rich, poor and in between, getting better or worse?”

Try an experiment in your mind with a society of 10 people. Five people earn $50,000 and five earn $100,000. Let’s say we flatten out the top half so that everyone earns the same. Equality! But who benefits? Absolutely no one. Society as a whole is poorer, and that is to the detriment of everyone: less capital, less wealth available for wealth-forming projects, demoralization among the smartest and most inspired and a ceiling on those who might have previously desired to move from the lower half to the upper half.

In any case, the supposed egalitarian ideal can always be achieved by driving everyone into the dirt and universalizing poverty. There is a serious problem, with an ideal that can be achieved by wrecking the lives of absolutely everyone.

In a free society, we just have to get used to the idea that some people are going to be vastly richer than other people. And those rich people do act as benefactors to the rest of us. They give more to charity. They start the new businesses that employ us. They take the risks that make capitalism dynamic and progressive. They act as society’s economic leadership team. And the individual members of that sector of society are constantly changing, and this is a good thing.

What’s more, in a free society, the rich are completely dependent on the poor and the middle class, who, in a market setting, make it possible for the capitalists of society to accumulate wealth in the first place. It is the voluntary choices of the masses that direct the use of society’s resources. The “distribution” of wealth is a result of the choices we all make in our capacity as consumers.

Yes, I’ve watched lectures by people who claim that societies with more equality are happier places. What they end up pointing to are places like Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Norway. This is just a mistake: These countries are demographically homogeneous and cannot be compared in any way to places like the U.K. or the U.S.

Consider this… Where would you rather live? Ethiopia or the Netherlands? Ethiopia has more income equality, according to the statisticians who calculate the so-called Gini coeffiicient. Another example: Tajikistan or Switzerland? The former has more equality than the latter. Another: Bangladesh or New Zealand? According to the egalitarians, we should rather live in one of the poorest places on the planet than one of the richest.

Again, the degree of equality is not in any sense related to the quality of life.

So why the hysteria right now? The real problem is more fundamental in the United States. The poor are growing and entrenching. The unemployed are staying this way. The middle class is slipping, and more substantially after the the recession statistically ended than when the statistical recession was on (and polls show that hardly anyone believes we are out of recession).

Now, this is catastrophic, not because this increases the income gap, but because it is killing the American dream. What the political left is doing is attempting to change the subject away from what matters (we are all getting poor) to what doesn’t matter (the income gap between the top and bottom). And this rhetorical shift is scary: It prepares the way for higher taxes, more redistribution, more attacks on the financially successful and more of all the policies that are causing our worst problems right now.

So why the focus on the equality? As Mises says in his great work Socialism (1922): “The principle of equality is most acclaimed by those who expect to gain more than they lose from an equal distribution of goods. Here is a fertile field for the demagogue. Whoever stirs up the resentment of the poor against the rich can count on securing a big audience.”

Americans should know better. Even when our economy was the freest in the world, we had one of the most unequal distributions of that wealth on the planet. It was during these years that the lifespans of everyone increased, when the chances of moving from poor to rich were huge, when the per capita income was growing as never before in human history. Growing inequality is likely to coincide with growing wealth (see How the West Grew Rich, the masterpiece by Nathan Rosenber).

We need to learn to admire the justly rich and strive to emulate them and their outlook on life. This is what the advice manuals of the late 19th century said. The most popular magazines of the time chronicled their lives, and they were held up as national heroes. This is a sign of a healthy society. It is because of this ethos that the poor of today live vastly better than the richest of the rich 100 years ago.

Today, on the other hand, we are told to resent the rich, attack them, hate them, expropriate them. This is the sure path to disaster. Freedom is what enables the poor to become rich. The state is the means by which everyone in society is driven into poverty. We need less state and more freedom.

----

From Mish Shedlock's Economic Trend Analysis Blog:

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis:

Note that Obama projected the unemployment rate to be under 6% now according to projections of the the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The only reason the unemployment rate is not 11% (or higher) is because 4.5 million people dropped out of the labor force vs. expected demographic gains."

With all these financial issues swimming about and morphing into election / campaign issues, I'm reminded of the following two quotes from the past.

“How did you go bankrupt?"
Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” -― Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises

This is how I'm afraid we'll go down if we do not get our fiscal house in order. Gradually and then suddenly. And the steps we are taking to FIX the crisis -- the "hair of the dog that bit you" strategy of more debt to cure a debt crisis, money printing and creation ad-nauseam, will also create an inflationary crisis (hyper-inflationary / currency crisis) that could lead to a GREAT-GREAT DEPRESSION.

And to all the OWS'ers and their supporters:

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H. L. Mencken

It's not a democracy folks, it's a republic.

Pure Democracy is evil.
http://www.albatrus.org/english/goverment/democracy/pure%20democracy%20is%20evil.htm

"Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few." --
George Bernard Shaw

"The majority is never right. Never, I tell you! That's one of these lies in society that no free and intelligent man can ever help rebelling against. Who are the people that make up the biggest proportion of the population --- the intelligent ones or the fools? I think we can agree it's the fools, no matter where you go in this world, it's the fools that form the overwhelming majority." -- Henrik Ibsen

Do the Right Thing!! - Would You? - The Penn State Saga

A couple of good articles on the 'bystander effect' and how it may have played an impact on the situation at Penn State.

I was somewhat reluctant to comment or post on this issue and SOME OF THE CONTENT THAT FOLLOWS IS FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY. However, as is usually the case, we see a bogey-man created and thrown under the bus for public consumption and the real issues of how we got to this point as a society / culture are not examined in any depth whatsoever.

Hang Paterno, Fire Boeheim. That will make everything all right. What will be worse is the solutions these PC, CYA loving douche-nozzles that run the entire system propose.

Sacrifice some underling and the public is mollified, but the behavior and the mind-set at the institutional level -- where the culture is set -- continues unabated and unexamined.

The video embedded in The Situationist blog is a real eye-opener.

The Situation of Penn State Bystanders « The Situationist:

"Many blame-laden fingers have been pointed at those who didn’t act immediately and decisively to stop the sexual atrocities that took place at Penn State.  We all know what the right thing to do was, and we are all confident that we would have done it.

But should we be?"

To state the obvious, what transpired within the Penn State football system was wrong on many levels. We know that rape is wrong, that rape should never happen, that if a rape does occur, it should be stopped from happening again. We know that pedophilia is wrong, that using power to exploit the vulnerable is wrong, that turning a blind eye to misdeeds is wrong. Still, wrong happens.

Perhaps going forward many of us may be more likely to “do the right thing” after this media frenzy than we would have been had we never been confronted with this story. But I’m interested in a slightly different question: would we ourselves, in the precise situation of those we are judging, really have acted so differently? Would we have immediately, vocally, and publicly intervened, protested, and contacted the police?

The following 37-minute video was assembled hastily to introduce a small group of my students to the events unfolding at Penn State. It contains video clips that depict, among other things, the integral role that football has long played at Penn State, the legendary and iconic status of Joe Paterno at that university, the different perspectives taken of those events and of Joe Paterno, and the various ways in which public and private law and the media have shaped the coverage and the reaction to the unfolding events. The video also includes several clips from ABC’s “What Would You Do?” series hosted by John Quiñones. Those clips might help remind viewers of some of the ways in which we tend to overestimate our own propensity to speak up, to resist, to get involved, or to fight back and underestimate our readiness to sit on our hands, to turn away, to opt for rose-tinted spectacles, or to go with the flow.

The video, be warned, has many problems (e.g., quality, editing, organization, redundancies); it did, however, provide useful fodder for what I thought was an illuminating discussion. Because of that, I decided to include it here in case others might find it useful. Though credits are not included, the vast majority of the videos can be found on Youtube.

------


Penn State, responsible citizenship and the bystander effect
BY CHRIS DOLAN

http://www.centralpennbusiness.com/article/20111117/POLITICS/111119840/Penn-State-responsible-citizenship-and-the-bystander-effect&template=politics

People have and will continue to say they would have “done something” or “gone straight to the police.” Such statements are easy to say in front of the like-minded. But, in reality, it is much too hard to do. This is why whistleblowers are, for the most part, condemned and shunned by society. It sometimes doesn't even pay to be morally responsible.

Just think about Joe Paterno. He failed to do what was right at the very moment society expected him to exercise his moral citizenship responsibilities. Paterno is a not a terrible human being. Even following his termination, he's still not a bad person. He was a great coach who dedicated his life to building the Penn State football program and supporting academic life on campus. However, he shouldn't have looked away.

Paterno and Penn State were engulfed and overwhelmed by the so-called “bystander effect,” which is when citizens consciously choose to do nothing because everyone else is doing nothing.
It's quite common. After Jayna Murray was murdered in a yoga studio in Bethesda, Md., Apple Store employees working immediately next door and hearing her screams decided to do nothing. The Apple manager even reported hearing a woman saying: “God help me. Please help me,” and “Talk to me. Don’t do this.” The now-famous video clip of Chinese toddler Xiao Yueyue being struck by two vehicles while people stood by, watched and then did nothing is a reflection of a desire to embrace bystander-ism.

It's harder to do the right thing when everyone else is doing nothing. The number of people at Penn State who reported the alleged abuse and then did nothing is far-reaching, but not surprising. Why? Building Penn State’s program took decades, and this abuse scandal has forced society to scrape the veneer to discover the ugly truth.

Penn State administrators and coaches did what they thought was right as citizens. They did nothing.

--

What is the culpability of those on the left side of the political aisle, who have promoted this type of mind-set, this type of behavior as "normal" for years and years under the guise of political correctness and tolerance?

Or have we forgotten the Obama administrations "Safe Schools Czar?"

This is the kind of SH*T they are teaching / promoting in the public schools.

And we wonder why Johnny can't read or write and add or subtract. You reap what you sow, I guess.


****** CONTENT WARNING ********
( BUT IT'S ABOUT THE OVERSEER OF SCHOOLS IN THIS COUNTRY) 

And then wonder why things like Penn State happen when jag-bags that think like this run the administration.

Good Riddance…Obama’s Radical Safe Schools Czar Hits the Skids
by Jim Hoft

http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2011/06/21/good-riddance-obamas-radical-safe-schools-czar-hits-the-skids/

In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money.

During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During the same workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here.

Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid$273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.

Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” was the keynote speaker at the GLSEN/Boston Conference at Tufts University in 2000. High school students at the conference learned about fisting and watersports from the GLSEN activists. Jennings is seen here holding the conference program.

(ViaMass Resistance)

Unfortunately for GLSEN, undercover journalists with Mass Resistance recorded these outrageous sessions at Tufts University. The audio was later leaked to a local radio station. This created such an uproar that GLSEN leaders were forced to apologize for their disgusting behavior.

Despite the controversy, Barack Obama’s Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings and his GLSEN organization did nothing to clean up their act. In fact in 2001 activists handed out “fisting kits” to the children and teachers who attended the GLSEN conference.

But that’s not all. The children who attended Kevin Jennnings’ GLSEN 2005 Conference also left with their own “Little Black Book – Queer in the 21st Century”.

This book exposes the young teens to–Rimming – Fisting – Water Sports (Pi$$ Play) – Toys
It’s what every teen needs to know…

The page titled “How safe is dat?” introduces young teens to fisting, rimming, and watersports (pi$$ing on your partner). Shouldn’t every teen know this?

After a two year stint, Obama’s Safe School’s czar Kevin Jennings has resigned from his position with the Obama Administration.

Sean Hannity reported on Jennings’ departure last night on his show.
Good riddance, Kevin Jennings.

----

But Paterno was the problem, right?

Or how about this little tid-bit.

If this story is true, what is ESPN's culpability in allowing these crimes to continue?

I'm sure they will hide behind some 1st Amendment issues, or even better, they didn't have "corroboration". DID JOE PATERNO? These type of crimes don't happen in front of crowds, now do they?

But shouldn't have the reporters turned over what they had to law enforcement?

Or is getting a "scoop" more important than child safety?

Read it and weep folks.

Outrageous: ESPN Sat on Molestation Tape Since 2002

http://conservativebyte.com/2011/11/outrageous-espn-sat-on-molestation-tape-since-2002/

BTW: Just asking so we know what the rules of the game are going forward.

Seems to be a lot of Monday morning QB'ing going on here.

These idiots need to worry less about a football coach, who in theory only oversees the football program and worry about the sex offenders running the administrations at these public schools.

Seems to me that there is a much bigger pool of deviants and perverts swimming around in THOSE waters. BWDIK?

Angel Pagan dealt to Giants for Torres, Ramirez: SFGate

Not exactly Miami Marlins flashy, but a solid deal. This moves Melky to LF and plugs that hole. If Pagan gets back to his 2010 numbers, this is an upgrade over Torres. The seat in CF is still being kept warm for Gary Brown, but he appears to be a year or two away.

Angel Pagan dealt to Giants for Torres, Ramirez: "The Giants will have a new option for center field in 2012.

The Giants and Mets agreed on a trade of players at the position Tuesday night, with Andres Torres (and reliever Ramon Ramirez) going to the Mets and Pagan moving to San Francisco."


Melky Cabrera, acquired last month in exchange for Jonathan Sanchez, is a more comfortable fit in left than center, and Nate Schierholtz remains the likely choice in right unless the Giants add another outfielder, though general manager Brian Sabean reiterated Tuesday that free-agent options are narrowing because of the lack of payroll flexibility.

Pagan, 30, hit .262 with a .322 on-base percentage, seven homers, 56 RBIs and 32 steals in 123 games. Though he projects as a top-of-the-order hitter along with Cabrera, Pagan batted fifth 56 times in 2011 for the Mets.

Giants Shopping Pair of Pitchers: Bleacher Report

As long as the pair does not include Lincecum or Cain I suppose this headline would be OK at first glance. However, the strength of the Giants recently has rested on it's depth. I would like to see the LHP's Affeldt and Lopez stay. Romo seems like the prototypical set-up guy, so he would be a keeper as well.

Giants Shopping Pair of Pitchers:

The Giants have a ton of money tied up in the bullpen right now, writes Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports, so they're trying to move Jeremy Affeldt or Ramon Ramirez. Many teams seek bullpen help, including the Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Tigers, Twins, Angels, Mariners, Mets, Brewers, Cardinals, and Reds.

Affeldt, a 32-year-old lefty, had his $5MM club option exercised by the Giants in October. Ramirez, a 30-year-old righty, projects to earn $2.3MM in his last year before free agency.

Including Affeldt, Ramirez, Brian Wilson ($8.5MM), Javier Lopez ($4.25MM), Santiago Casilla ($1.9MM estimated), and Sergio Romo ($1.3MM estimated), the Giants project to have a $23.25MM bullpen in 2012. That doesn't seem too bad against a $130MM payroll, though it increases to over 23% of the team's spending once you remove the dead weight of Barry Zito and Aaron Rowand.

Norman’s conquest - Elburn Herald

I was truly gratified to receive the following updates regarding the progress of one of my former players -- Beloit College LHP Alex Norman -- from an understandably proud father.

After a week where the news of the day made things tough on anyone who puts the title of Coach in front of their name, it did my heart good to see the visions and aspirations that we had for this young man develop and play out over the last seven years.

Here's my Three Lefties Kaneland High School Freshman Baseball, 2005.

Alex is on the far left.

A great trio of pitchers who formed the nucleus of a pitching staff and team that I believed was a special group capable of accomplishing special things.

We wanted to build a strong foundation for a Kaneland program and tasked this group to turn around the fortunes of a program that did not have great success before 2005. We expected that they would achieve great things at the varsity level and that the program would arrive as a force to be reckoned with and respected in the conference and the surrounding area.

I believe that this group of kids did, in fact, lay the groundwork for a program that would later bring a state title back home to Kaneland.

http://slavieboy.blogspot.com/2011/06/kaneland-shuts-down-opponents-stars.html

Alex has always been the epitome of a stylish left-handed pitcher and a great student of the game. You always felt comfortable with him on the mound that you would get a solid effort, he could control a running game as well as one his models -- Andy Pettitte --, and he would find ways to get guys out and get out of innings without damage.

Hitters would go home wearing different size collars and maybe wondering how. But in the end, they took the collar home. Next game, same story. It was fun to watch him develop and grow as a pitcher.

As coaches and fans, we sometimes wonder where the guys -- like a Jamie Moyer or an Alex Norman-- who pitch effectively with guts, guile and finesse are. Why do they seem to be so hard to find and identify?

All the while they are right there. Right in front of our noses. Pitching their asses off while we peer into the radar guns, reading off numbers and shaking our heads. If only pitching, or pitching evaluation could be that easy.

In baseball, sometimes we focus too much on the laundry list of things we can easily identify and quantify. We focus too much on things that kids cannot do and fail to identify and cultivate the things that kids can do. It's a little bit of CYA on our part as coaches. We play the evaluation game a little bit too safe. Intangibles are difficult to evaluate and harder for folks to see. So we tend to miss a lot on guys like Alex Norman. We go home as coaches shaking our heads, thinking "how did we miss?" in much the same way hitters walk away from an AB against Alex.

This is a can-do type of kid who finds a way to succeed and win. I never get tired of seeing success stories of this kind and Alex deserves all the success and notoriety he receives. A real classy kid.

During difficult, turbulent times, his story gives me a tangible answer to the question "Why do you keep doing this crazy thing called coaching?"

WAY TO GO ALEX!!!

We are all very proud of you. Keep up the good work.

====
THE ALEX NORMAN FILE:

Norman’s conquest - Elburn Herald:

"Junior pitcher Alex Norman, graduate of Kaneland High School in 2008, earned First Team honors on the American Baseball Coaches Association (ABCA) All-Central Region Team for Beloit College.

One of three Buccaneers honorees, Norman established himself as the ace of the staff this season. He closed the regular season with a 7-2 record, tying him for the most wins in a single-season, and a 2.55 ERA, the fifth-best mark in Beloit history. He also has a better than 4 to 1 strikeout-to-walk ratio, having fanned 42 while walking just 11 in 67 innings.

He led the MWC in wins, ERA and innings pitched.

He earned MWC First Team honors this season."

http://triblocal.com/des-plaines/community/stories/2011/06/patriots-norman-pitches-perfect-game/

Des Plaines Patriots’ ace, Alex Norman, pitched a perfect game Sunday, June 5th beating the Park Ridge Indians 13-0 at Maine East High School. Due to the incredible run support by the Patriots, the game was called after five innings under what is known as the “mercy” rule.

It took Norman only 44 pitches to get through five perfect innings, retiring 15 batters consecutively. “I didn’t think it was going to happen,” said Norman, “ I’ve always thought about pitching the perfect game-every pitcher does.”

Will Tim Lincecum sign a multiyear contract? | Extra Baggs

I think you have to sign Timmy and Matt Cain just as a reward for services rendered. Both should be able to pitch effectively well into their low to mid thirties. Neither one show signs of being high risks for injury or ineffectiveness. Linceum has already made the transition from thrower to pitcher and Cain is showing signs of doing the same.


From Extra Baggs blog:

Will Tim Lincecum sign a multiyear contract? Is the book of Eli coming to an end? Plus other Giants notes | Extra Baggs:

"As we all know, the Giants front office is in favor of a rule change that would protect catchers from being targeted in home-plate collisions. GM Brian Sabean and manager Bruce Bochy both came out strongly in favor of changing the rules after Buster Posey’s season-ending injury at the plate May 25. But neither Sabean nor Bochy has been able to build any consensus within the industry. Joe Torre, MLB’s on-field operations chief, told Bochy a few months ago that he would not support any rule changes to protect catchers. Amid that climate, my understanding is that the Giants will not even bother to raise the issue."

---------

Will Tim Lincecum sign a multiyear contract? Is the book of Eli coming to an end? Plus other Giants notes | Extra Baggs:

"The Giants face one immediate action date on Friday. They must set reserve lists, which means protecting those players who otherwise would be eligible to be taken in the Rule 5 draft. You protect eligible players by placing them on your 40-man roster.

Charlie Culberson, Roger Kieschnick and Nick Noonan are the most recognizable names of minor leaguers who are eligible to be snatched up by another club unless they’re protected. You might not know about right-hander Hector Correa, but I consider him the easiest slam dunk to be added to the 40-man. He’s a potential impact relief arm and will be graded appropriately on Baseball America’s top prospects list. (Huge extra credit points if you remember that the Giants got Correa two springs ago when they traded Jack Taschner to the Pirates for Ronny Paulino, then flipped Paulino to Florida.)"

Right now, the Giants have 36 players on the 40-man. I suspect they will add Correa and Culberson, at least. Kieschnick is a tougher call but probably ranks third on the list. Noonan, sadly, has dropped off the map.

The Giants also might look to protect lefty David Quinowski and right-hander Justin Fitzgerald. Right-hander Daniel Otero has been a closer in the system and isn’t a pure stuff guy, but has solid numbers and might merit a roster spot. Catchers Johnny Monell and Jackson Williams would be in play, too. Monell is not a premium defender, but has left-handed power and that is a rarity.

One thing is for sure: The Giants won’t max out their 40-man. They need to keep space open in case they sign a free agent or add a player in a trade, etc.

But there is a way the club can create more space to protect some of these prospects: By cutting ties now with others on the roster who are not in the plans for 2012. The Giants have a slew of arbitration-eligible players and they don’t plan to offer contracts to all of them. Officially, they don’t have to tender those contracts until midnight on Dec. 12. But if they already know they aren’t going to bring back players like Eli Whiteside, Jeff Keppinger, Mike Fontenot, etc., they might as well do them a favor and let them loose by Friday. That way, they can have more time to catch on with another team.

Whiteside, in particular, is a candidate to be taken off the roster. He’s beloved by his teammates, he caught the only no-hitter by a Giant in almost four decades and he owns a World Series ring. I think Giants fans will always think fondly of Eli. But Chris Stewart clearly brought more defensive skills to the table last year.

Sabean Explains Sanchez-for-Cabrera Deal: Bleacher Report

Sabean Explains Sanchez-for-Cabrera Deal:

Just got off the conference call with Brian Sabean, Bruce Bochy and Melky Cabrera about the Cabrera/Jonathan Sanchez deal. Here are the highlights:

Sabean can’t yet say where Cabrera will bat in the lineup, what position he’ll play, how this will affect other trades or free-agent pursuits, and who will replace Sanchez in the rotation.

He said he needs to reconvene with manager Bruce Bochy, who just returned from Taiwan, and come up with an updated plan ahead of next week’s GM meetings in Milwaukee.

In spite of all the Sanchez trade talks over the years, Sabean said he never got a good offer or was close to dealing him, and Sanchez’s struggles and injuries this year actually hurt Sabean’s ability to make a better deal this year.

Bochy on Cabrera: “He crosses home plate, and that’s a need here.”

This sounds a lot like the Pablo Sandoval story. Cabrera got fat and out of shape and had a terrible 2010 season, then rededicated himself to working out last offseason. Cabrera and Sabean said that was they key to his career year offensively, and Cabrera pledged to maintain his workouts this winter.

Bochy acknowledged what a lot of you saw on TV from the Taiwan tour, saying he thought Sandoval looked as though he gained weight since the end of the season. Sandoval swore he didn’t, said the uniform made him look big and promised to come into camp weighing less than he did last spring. Sandoval also will play about 10 games in Venezuelan winter ball in December.

Cabrera said he can cover center field at AT&T Park.

Sabean said he has no regrets not trading Sanchez before, when his value could have been higher, because they needed his arm. “In this case, given the player available and given our acute need for more offense, this was the time to cross that bridge.”

The Giants ended Gary Brown’s Arizona Fall League season early because he got severely ill, but tests showed no Valley Fever.

Sabean has no plans to go after Cuban defector Yoennis Cespedes, an outfielder.

Eight is enough for Tebow - AFC West Blog - ESPN

"Just win, baby", right? Thanks Al!!

Eight is enough for Tebow - AFC West Blog - ESPN:

"The Broncos are 3-1 with Tebow as their starter this season. Since the start of last season, Denver is 4-3 with Tebow as its starter, 4-14 with Kyle Orton. All three of Tebow’s victories this season have come on the road. The truth is the Broncos just play better with Tebow as their quarterback. With the exception of the complete stinker at home against Detroit two weeks ago, Denver’s play has been very competitive with Tebow."

Good pitchers win when they don't have their best stuff. They find a way. That's the mark of a champion. That's what people don't get about this kid. He's a winner.

His W-L record stands in stark contrast to those who wanted to grade him based on his mechanics in the pre-season, some placing him fourth or fifth on the depth chart.

Everyone compared him unfavorably to Cam Newton, and while the fantasy geeks may prefer the stellar numbers Newton puts up, I'll take Tebow's W-L record every time. Heck, I would rather lose with Tebow than win with (S)cam anyway. Tebow is a winner if his team finishes 0-16. How many kids can you say that about? Meanwhile the NCAA will be vacating Auburn victories in about five years if the Reggie Bush experience is a reliable indicator.

Now the doubters are beginning to realize their darkest dreams are slowly turning into somewhat of a nightmare. The fear among the haters was that if given the chance, this kid would succeed. So they had to make the Broncos brass feel like fools if they even considered giving Tebow a realistic opportunity to start.

4-3 as a starter versus 4-14 for Orton. With the same personnel at their disposal. Those numbers speak volumes. Let's go to Todd McShay or Mel Kiper or Trent Dilfer for another critique of Tebow's mechanics, though. Maybe throw in Merrill Hoge for good measure.

I keep telling folks, this kid will be a winner if given the chance.

His character and work ethic and abilities will not allow that to happen. His leadership ability will create synergies on this team that will make those around him better.

That's what great players do.

They take 1 + 1 and make 3.

Average to good players take 1 + 1 and make 2.

Bad players turn 1 + 1 into 0. Or a negative number.

I watched Jay Cutler get equally frustrated by the Lions defense two weeks after Tebow suffered his worst start as a pro against them. The stats were only slightly in Cutler's favor. And nobody doubts that Cutler belongs in the league. His mechanics are so pretty. And the ball moves so well throught he air when he throws it. STOP!!! Enough already.

"You play to win the game!!"" Thanks Herm.



Now the narrative will change to "Well, Fox had to completely change his team's offensive approach to accommodate Tebow". Well "No duh!!!" That's what coaches do. Put the personnel that they have in the best position to win.

Bill Belichick could have maintained and protected his reputation as a defensive genius while the game changed around him. But he adapted and allowed Tom Brady and the offensive personnel the Patriots gathered to flourish. They started to outscore people instead of grind people out.
By doing that, in my mind, he elevated himself from defensive genius to coaching genius.

John Fox is demonstrating the same thing here with Tebow and the Broncos.

I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT IT'S TRUE

Giants Make Decision on Beltran??

If this happens, we know the total cost of the Rent-a-Beltran program. One top-flight, potential top of the rotation starter in exchange for a roll of the dice on defending the crown.

A crown that it now seems like the bulk of the rest of the team had little or no interest in defending.

One reason why it is difficult to evaluate trades when they are made. Using 20/20 hindsight when more information is available, makes it more informative and clearly more fun.

Score this one a bust, although at the time Sabean can be excused for trying to inject some life into an otherwise life-less squad. IMO, this team needed a bit of a heart-transplant. Beltran was asked to provide something he had no ability to provide.

Giants Make Decision on Beltran:

Jon Heyman reports that the Giants are no longer going to try to re-sign Carlos Beltran. Because when you add an .809 OPS outfielder like Melky Cabrera and take away a .910 OPS outfielder like Beltran, your severe offensive problems are all better.

Giants trade Jonathan Sanchez to Kansas City for Melky Cabrera | Extra Baggs

Interesting deal. A little stop-gap measure in CF. Say bye-bye to Torres. Keep the seat warm for Gary Brown in CF until 2012.

A bit of a disturbing trend in that Cabrera joins a team laden with guys whose resume includes the following phrases:

- "when healthy, he produces". Problem is, he's rarely healthy, always on the DL.
- "when he's in shape, he produces". Hmmmm.... that's like the guy at work who the boss says "when he shows up, he's a good worker". Those guys tend to get fired, or hurt morale.

Another "odd-even", "good year, bad year" guy. At least we traded a guy who has some of the same problems with inconsistent performance. The classic trade that hurts both teams.

A good deal for the Giants, if all the "ifs" come through.

Including Verdugo seemed like a bit much. He will advance easier through the Royals organization, perhaps starting for them at some point. He's a high-K, high-BB LHP prospect. Seems like you have to be more patient with those. He misses bats and keeps the ball in the park, so in a good pitchers park, he could really shine. KC has one of those as well.

We do seem to be getting a bit light on the LHP side of the ledger.

Giants trade Jonathan Sanchez to Kansas City for Melky Cabrera | Extra Baggs:

"Sanchez misses bats as well as anyone, he has great stuff and he’ll forever be a breakout candidate. But he led the NL in walks in 2010 and then his walk rate went up this past season. He wasn’t a picnic for the coaching staff to deal with, and while he was on disabled-list limbo with mild elbow tendinitis, he told me he felt underappreciated by the organization. I know those comments did not go over well in the front office. All of that added up to a non-tender move, especially after the Giants basically spent Sanchez’s money on lefties Javier Lopez and Jeremy Affeldt.

Still, they were able to turn Sanchez into Cabrera, and sure, he is neither a premium defender nor does he walk enough for a leadoff man. But he is coming off a 200-hit, 100-run season and he’s entering the prime of his career. The Giants were able to sell low and buy high, all while plugging in a player at a position of need and saving a few bucks. They also found a way to get a center fielder without blocking top prospect Gary Brown."