[Make it Milledge]

I agree that in a bench role Lillibridge brings more to the tabel for his price than Teahan ever will. No one is gonna take Teahan off our hands unless we eat salary which is not wise. What a mess KW got himself into with that horrible extension and Teahan had not proved a darn thing yet.

 

Regardless of who might get hurt or traded, I really don't see Lillibridge as a good option for the Sox. As much as people complain that Teahen doesn't do anything well, Lillibridge does less things less well (if that makes sense). Like Teahen, he can play a lot of positions but is not excellent at any of them. Unlike Teahen, he can't hit worth a lick (regardless of a week of excellence last season).

[2011 White Sox closer]

I have my concerns about Thornton as the full-time closer due to his reliance upon one pitch (a pretty straight fastball that comes in at about 99 and probably looks like it comes in at 103) and I think if teams game planned for him to be the full-time closer, which they never really did before, he may face a few more struggles.

 

All that being said, I have no problems if and when he is named closer and still think he will be extremely successful.

 

While the main point (reliance on a single pitch) may be true, it's not like the league (and especially the AL Central) haven't been able to prepare for him by now. Other than some mental problem pitching the ninth, his history of success as a late inning reliever absolutely points to Thorton's ability to be successful as a closer. A one-pitch pitcher should be just as easy to hit in the 8th as in the 9th. Whether or not you (generic you, not you in particular Wite) believe that someone "earned" the spot or is "owed" the spot, there's no doubt that Thornton has proven to be the best reliever on the Sox and one of the better ones in baseball. As other posters have said, the real debate is where is Thorton's value the highest to the Sox - coming in at the tough spots or 9th inning specialist. My hope is that the other bullpen options prove to be good enough that Thornton can be a shut-down, we-don't-want-to-face-that-guy-in-the-ninth closer.

[Job Hunt Thread]

I am a human resources intern and I spend a lot of time reviewing resumes. I see a lot of what you see and I agree with most of what you said. I might have limited experience, but have noticed a lot of what you are talking about. I actually saw a resume a few weeks back for an administrative position where the woman listed her karate achievements on her resume (example: 3rd place in tournament 2006). I don't know what she was going for there.

 

I would like to add to your list as well. I am quite confused as to why companies still demand cover letters. Every single one says the same thing. It is an overview of the resume, followed by "I know that I would be a great fit for your organization" and "I look forward to hearing from you" I don't even read them except to confirm that the person applying can write complete sentences.

 

A lot of cover letters may be cookie cutter, but sometimes you really do see something different and interesting (or vice versa, something that kills an applicant's chances). I still think they serve a useful purpose.

[Australia]

In relative size, Australia is pretty much the same exact size as the US. So driving from one area to another (such as the Outback) is quite a trek.

 

Keep in mind what I said about the seasons...but so long as you remain near the Northern coast you should be ok...but Sydney won't be very warm that time of year.

 

I was mostly concerned about the weather (and water temperature) in the north, but your comments about the Sydney, etc are spot on.

[Australia]

Thanks for the replies everybody!

 

 

The problem with seeing the Outback is it cannot really be "brief", as it's not close to any of the other popular areas like Sydney/Cairns (pronounces Cans).

 

Yeah, that's our problem. If we're gonna spend that much time on the dive boat, it makes it hard to see much else considering the distance between everything. We're hoping to hit a couple of other cool things while realizing we'll also miss lots of great stuff.

[Australia]

My wife and I are planning a trip to Australia for sometime this summer (May, June, or July). We're building the trip around 5 or 7 days on a live aboard on the Great Barrier Reef. Given schedules, we can probaby spend another week (maybe 10 days) in other parts of Australia. Any suggestions on "can't miss" things to see or do? We'd love to get to the outback, even briefly. A quick trip to Tasmania would be fun, but I'm not sure we can fit it in.

 

We'll probably fly into Sydney, then take flights around Australia on one of the local carriers (Qantas, Virgin Blue, JetStar, or Tiger). The only other city we'll be in for sure is Cairns, where we'll meet the live aboard.

[Gatlinburg]

It's a giant tourist trap, so there are definitely plenty of restaurants, mini-golf, etc. Traffic can be really bad at times on the "main strip" (441) that goes north-south from Sevierville into Gatlinburg.

 

One of our favorites there is the aquarium - it's pretty good. If you have any interest in the outdoors, definitely head into Smokey Mountain National Park (http://www.gsmnp.com/) even if it is just to drive some of the better loops or the Newfound Gap road.

[*Official* Work Out Thread]

Anyone have tips for preventing arthritic joints from getting worse?

 

I find that just working out consistently helps; my joints feel worse when I'm not working out. I started P90x and was surprised that it wasn't harder on my joints.

 

Yoga and aleve?

 

My wife and I took classes at The Glowing Body here in Knoxville and were pretty happy with a beginner's class (we needed "yoga for dummies").

[1098-T Box 5 Question]

When I did it, it just lowered my education expenses and therefore lowered the amount of Lifetime Learning Credit I could receive.

 

I found the problem. My university put my Spring 2010 tuition expenses on my 2009 1098-T but put my Spring 2010 waiver on my 2010 1098-T. As a result, I get a negative number in boxes 2 adn 6 on Form 8917. If you carry a negative number over from Form 8917 to Box 34 of the 1040, it creates a situation where you subtract a negative number and hence "add" that number to your adjusted gross income. I pointed this out to the university and am trying to get them to correctly move my waiver from Box 5 (this year's waiver) to Box 6 (adjustments to last year's waiver). I'm sure this will be fun!

[1098-T Box 5 Question]

I realize that I might ultimately need to go to a tax professional to answer this question, but I thought I would try my friends at SoxTalk first. I am also going to fill out all the paperwork by hand to double check if there is a problem with my tax software (TurboTax).

 

The institution that I recently got my PhD from is now putting my tuition waiver amount in Box 5 (scholarships or grants) on the 1098-T. I talked to the head of Student Accounts at the school, and she claims that this should have no impact on my taxation except my ability to claim education (tuition) deductions. Logically, I agree with her.

 

However, using TurboTax, anything in Box 5 seems to be treated as taxable income (it does not show up on the W2) and is dramatically increasing my tax liability (amount owed). Maybe this is just a TurboTax problem, but if I choose to not take an education deduction, I presume that I would not have to enter the 1098-T information at all, thus avoiding the issue altogether.

 

Is anyone here having a similar problem? Does anyone know if there is an "impact" of Box 5 on the 1098-T beyond ability to claim education expenses?

[Chris Sale Will Start the Season in the Bullpen]

For some reason, Thornton scares me as the closer. I think he'd do fine, but I also think that Sale would be a better option. Better all around stuff, and it keeps Thornton in the role in which he has been the best.

 

For as good as Thornton has been, he really "deserves" the chance to be the closer. If Sale is good enough to close as a rookie (more or less), then he is good enough to handle Thornton's old "shutdown" role. It's a win-win for the Sox and the players involved.

[The Finer Things In Life]

I had a good beer weekend in Asheville. Tried some of the local stuff (Highland's Gaelic Ale, Asheville Brewing Company's Shiva, and Biltmore's Cedric's Pale Ale), some stuff from around the country that I hadn't seen before (Foothills Brewing Co's Sexual Chocolate and Green Flash Brewing's Fizzy Yellow Beer), and a nice selection of Belgians on tap. Many of these were at the Thirsty Monk, which is a great beer bar if anyone is ever in the Asheville area.

 

Unfortunately, the weather was a bit too cold to be outside as much as we wanted, but the beer made up for it!

[Job Hunt Thread]

Thanks for the commentary about the MBA - do you guys think it would be worth my while at least taking the GMAT while I am in school mode? Then maybe I could work and go back within five years (assuming that is how long scores are good for)? Or would that hurt me in the end if I chose to go into something that was more GRE related? I've heard it is more of an intelligence test as opposed to content so that is why I asked now, since I still have study skills.

 

I agree on the MBA comments thus far. Not much value to employers nor to you if you do not have some work experience to back it up. MBAs are great for networking and also great for mid-career changes (that's the main benefit I got from it), but the best part of the classes is the interaction with your classmates. Be wary of any MBA program where most students have limited work experience.

 

For me, the tough part of the GMAT was remembering math I hadn't had since high school. If you think you'd do ok, go ahead and take it, but it would be best to take a couple of practice tests first to make sure you really would do ok on it.

 

By the way, the last time I took the GMAT was about 6 years after the first one, and my score only declined about 10 points. I could easily have made up that 10 points by studying a little harder for it.

[i am drunk]

Got hammered last night. (and I mean hammered) A fat chick took me home.. So ashamed.

 

Did you cram it in the boot?

[Sox have been trying to extend Danks for 2.5 years]

I understand that. So I guess "All-In" means we're completely going for it for 2 seasons, but after that we're going to suck for a while. I hope they spend more on the draft from 2013 onward so they can rebuild more quickly. I guess the rebuild is coming, they're just putting it off for a couple of years. I hope that they get a first round pick when Danks leaves, though, or that he's not in their plans for next season, and they have a viable replacement. Just another reason why Sale should be starting in AAA.

 

You've said this twice now. While I can see the logic (players leaving via FA, not much help seemingly available in the minors), I don't think you can make this claim quite so confidently. The Sox have never sucked for a while during KW's reign, and a lot can happen in a couple of years, especially if the Sox can sustain a higher payroll to fill the gaps. Two years also provides enough time for prospects in the lower levels of the minors to develop to where they could help the Sox either at the major league level or as trade fodder.

[2011 Films Thread]

The Other Guys was one of the worst moves I have ever seen. There was almost nothing funny about that movie.

[The Finer Things In Life]

I really like Knoxville, but I gotta say that it has one of the worst selections of beers of any place I have ever lived. Thankfully I still make plenty of trips out of state which will now be known as long distance beer runs.

 

On the positive side, I'm still nursing the Sierra Celebration I bought in Atlanta and the Goose Island I bought in Chicago.

[Keith Law's top ten]

Which prospect has he been wrong about? The whole KLaw anti-white sox is the new measuring column inches in the tribune. It's pretty embarrassing actually.

 

In order to make a fair comparison, you would have to compare his right/wrong rates for the Sox versus all other major league teams because all teams' prospects fail at an incredibly large rate.

[Keith Law's top ten]

Obvious to what? His job is to tell you what he thinks. Do you really want to real articles that say every player is the best, like you're watching ESPN coverage of the NFL draft? Again, I can go to Whitesox.com and read articles on how great Jordan Danks and Tyler Flowers are. If only it were true.

 

You're missing the point. You are arguing that we, as Soxtalkers, want sunshine blown up our a**es by Law. That's not true. What many of us feel is that Law consistently rates Sox players and prospects below other analysts and writers. Sure, Law may like a Sox player/prospect or two, but it remains a valid point that he consistently rates Sox players/prospects lower than others do.

[sox payroll hike in conjunction with cubs "rebuild"?]

I just can't buy this at all.

 

I understand your point of view, but let me counter with this: when a team is winning (any team) and the stadium is suddenly full, are these latent fans of the team (e.g., the Sox) that just hadn't spent the money on the team and now decide to come to more games? Or is there a significant number of "casual" and "bandwagon" fans that fill the stadium? (Ok, that's a false dichotomy since I think it is some of both.)

 

Also, how do you build a fan base? How do you engage that family of four so that they spend their entertainment money on a few extra Sox games per year instead of something else? So that when the sons/daughters of that family grow up, they also bring their kids to games on the South side?

 

I think the Sox are doing what Anaheim is doing, albeit in a less publisized way: trying to move the long term fan base in the area towards a Sox orientation. I think you do that by consistently winning (and also with lesser things like making the park more family friendly).

[sox payroll hike in conjunction with cubs "rebuild"?]

How do you figure? Sox-Cubs is one of the biggest rivalries in baseball. If anything, the Brewers are competition for the Sox, not the Cubs, since Sox fans can easily make the drive to Miller Park and watch a good baseball game in (IMO) a better atmosphere with better prices. There can't be too many better places to tailgate than Miller Park.

 

It is pretty basic business strategy. If someone is going to buy sports tickets, they have the option of buying tickets to any of the major sports teams in Chicago. Milwaukee is not a substitute product except for those in the northern suburbs. If you want to buy tickets to a summer sporting event, you choose between Sox and Cubs.

 

One anecdote....a friend of mine works for the Braves. His biggest "rivals" from a ticket sales perspective are the other sports teams in Atlanta, and to a lesser extent, other means by which people can spend their entertainment dollars (movies, concerts, etc). For casual fans, the Sox and Cubs are substitutes for each other. As I've stated above, this is not about die hard fan bases, but instead about the bandwagon type fans that take attendance from 30,000 to capacity.

 

Further, I think your argument tends to ignore that the Sox have outdrawn the Cubs many times in the past, just not much in the recent past. The more the Sox can appeal to the casual fan as well as non-baseball fans that they can draw to the sport, the better off they'll be.

[sox payroll hike in conjunction with cubs "rebuild"?]

I think what u are talking about is pure coincidence. Consider all the facts. The sox had something like $80M committed coming into this offseason for 2011. A huge chunk of that was built around our pitching staff, which over the next couple years will see guys like Danks, Buehrle, Peavy, and Jackson become free agents so when you have the pitching core now, generally you go for it. Even if the sox made marginal or no additional FA signings, with their arbitration eligible players their payroll still would have been about $90-$100M. So JR was presented with two scenarios for this off season, pay $90M minimum for a 78 win team and play the kids at 1B, C, DH, bullpen, etc, or add an additional $25-35M to your payroll bring back PK, AJ, get Dunn, sign some bullpen guys and build a 90 game winner on paper. Obviously he choose the second option. I really dont think the cubs and their off season or strategy have anything to do with anything.

 

The Sox did not make the decision because of the Cubs situation, but you cannot ignore that the Cubs are the Sox's biggest competition for ticket sales. Putting a winning product on the field while the Cubs are not certainly helps the Sox significantly, especially as the Sox continue on their quest to build the Sox into a team that is not the "second" team in the city.

[sox payroll hike in conjunction with cubs "rebuild"?]

Um, I'm fairly certain [more like absolutely certain] that whatever we do or don't do is tied into what the Cubs do in any way shape or form. As far as us taking away some of their fan base, that ship has long sailed. We had our chance at that going in '06 and have failed pretty miserably since then. Basically, until we go on a run, something like what the Twins have done, the Cubs will always be king around here when it comes to sell-outs and popularity. And also, I don't know where one got the idea the Cubs were going into 'rebuild' mode. Soriano isn't going anywhere. Zambrano isn't going anywhere. Fukodome isn't going anywhere. Dempster's due almost 30 million the next two years. Silva ain't going anywhere. I guess Ramirez would be the only real attractive piece of all their high-priced players. But even then you'd have to find a legitimate match. Which wouldn't be easy considering he's only got 1 year and over 14 million due. The Cubs simply have too many horrid contracts to ever go into rebuild mod at least until after the '12 season.

 

Rebuild or not, the Cubs likely won't be very good this year.

 

Also, I think you overly focus on the "world series" bump and not on the bigger picture. The Sox need to keep winning to keep their fan base engaged and buying tickets. The Sox have had one of the better decades in their history, and there is a "bump" that comes from that, even if they did squander an even greater opportunity by fading in 2006 and bombing in 2007.

 

Third, nobody is claiming the Sox are going to take any hard core Cub fans, but there is a group of casual baseball fans in Chicago, not to mention bandwagon fans, whose tickets sales are up for grabs.

[sox payroll hike in conjunction with cubs "rebuild"?]

I think the timing is coincidental. The Sox are at a point where (as many articles and JR himself said), it is time to go all in or rebuild. The Sox have long sought to bring the causual fan over to the "Sox" side of the spectrum, and this type of fan comes over when the team is winning (and stays when the team keeps winning). The Sox know that a rebuilding effort pretty much kills any momentum built up over the last decade and the 2005 World Series title.

 

However, it certainly helps the Sox if casual fans find nothing exciting on the north side and spend their ticket money on the south side instead.

[White Sox have interest in Freddy Garcia]

There's a pretty stable faction of posters around here who think the White Sox should be looking to trade John Danks for a king's ransom as the trade deadline approaches since he hasn't signed an extension yet. If everyone's health is in-line, players are performing up to or beyond expectations/potential, and the deal is right, I don't think it'd be out of the question to consider it an option to hold onto Freddy and trade Danks and replenish the system a little bit.

 

If the team is performing, there is no way you trade Danks during the season.