Leaderboard

Who the f*** does Bruce Levine think he is? I get hearing the rumor and digging deep to find truth to it, but until you actually KNOW FOR A FACT that Moncada does have "ADD," I probably wouldn't run with it on my stupid ass radio show. What a fucking jackass.

The White Sox have been so terrible for so long, the main motivation I had to visit was Filibuster AND maybe discussing movies and a few other interests (financial). The depressing thing here is that we're all supposed to be bonded by being White Sox fans...and yet the vitriol is so overwhelming that a community with shared interests can't get along. (I'm also pretty sure if everyone on this board had actually met in real life at a Sox game and got to actually know each other, the tenor of conversations would be quite different, but that's obviously not feasible, some of us are thousands of miles away from Chicago.) Imagine how poorly that augurs for the rest of American society, when their used to be more beliefs about who we are as Americans that united us together as one, rather than dividing us. There used to be a sense of care/concern for anyone struggling in life, down on their luck, depressed or lonely...now there's more and more a prevailing sense that everyone is pretty much on their own, nobody can help you but yourself (and your family.) In the end, the political system has won again. They've managed to put the "common people" at each other's throats and distract them from the issues that really matter in the world. We've gotten bogged down in details, gossip, scandals, conspiracies and minutiae.

If you don't need winning, you are a casual fan, which you have proven yourself to be over and over and over again with comments like these. If you are a die-hard fan, which most posters at this board are, then winning is your number one goal. Period.

If you need winning to be a fan you aren't a fan, Wow what a stupid reply, sometimes silence is golden.

Given the current political climate, Soxtalk has decided to close ( filibuster forum. This move was not taken lightly by the admins/moderators (and for transparency, not everyone agreed with this move), however, given the current political climate, and how that climate can become so toxic (on both sides of the aisle), we have decided it is in the best interest of the forum to remove the "no holds bar" filibuster in an attempt to ensure increased civility on Soxtalk. Please note that while Filibuster has been closed, we are not banning "news" type stories from being posted. There are many topics discussed within the filibuster which can now be discussed within SLAP, however, the flexibility to be "less civil" will not exist. If you want to make posts, you need to stick 100% to the news. There will be no "slinging of mud" tolerated. Posts will be removed and suspensions will be levied. Purely "by the aisle" threads (republican vs. democrat) will not be tolerated, however, we do intend to have pinned threads around shortly before / after the election, to enable healthy dialogue around the elections (again, adherence to the rules will be key). Similarly, financial threads, etc, are all fair game (and those threads have been moved to SLAM), however, again, the focus should not be on the partisianism of the topic, but the facts. This change is one that we will continually evaluate in the best interest of the board and certainly look at all the members for various feedback in terms of how its going and ways to make it better. Similarly, when it comes to the rest of the site, we always look for similar feedback to help ensure we are having effective discussions and cordial communications. We are going to give everyone a "clean slate" from any past issues/run-ins on the political front, but on a go-forward basis heed the strong warning and remember, if you want to purely talk politics, there are other avenues to have more heated discussions and debate (whether you want to debate the other party or prefer to live in your own "ecco" chamber). The threads that evolve into "light political" talk can remain, however, follow the rules. Do not make blanked comments around "republican are X or democrats are Y", etc. If you want to have those discussions, you can take those to a forum focused on that. This is a White Sox site first and foremast which has evolved into so much more. It truly is a community, one in which has new faces emerge and old faces sometimes depart (or go on hiatus before re-emerging). It started in the days before smart phones and has survived friendster, myspace, facebook, twitter, instagram, etc. Remember that "unity" we all have in common and treat people with respect. If you have questions feel free to post. We've always embraced open dialogue and feedback, but please remember the golden rule and think of the below quotes when you post on the site.

I honestly think it's a smart move and wish all sports message boards took this leap. Another board I'm on dropped it for a bit...then brought it back and honestly all it does is stir bad blood. Times we live in I guess. Good lord...the responses on Facebook or news pages are bad enough. One of the reasons I dropped Facebook (I have a fake/burner page now and don't follow any people). But the vitriol is ridiculous. Each side digs in and won't back down thinking "their news source" is the accurate one lol. It's tribalism at it's best. Personally...I think that's how our "leaders" want it...keep the masses at each other's throats...and it keeps them in business. Plus...I can't imagine having to moderate that bullshit. Anyway...I applaud the move.

Over the long haul it should...if it doesn't, we have way bigger problems. You obviously want to have some liquidity because you don't want to be a "forced" seller, however, when you invest long, low cost target date / index funds are the way to go. The biggest part is putting it away. The sooner you can do it the better and if you can only afford so much in year 1, no matter how small, do it, and than try to auto bump up your deferral rate so that over time you are socking more aside. But the more you can (to extent it is at all possible) live below your means when you are young, the better and quicker you can build up / accumulate enough assets that can work for you. I'm not saying crawl up into a hole and don't live, you need to live and you need to splurge from time to time, but if you can get ahead and accumulate assets...time will work in your favor and you will start generating nice amounts of "passive" window that can either enable you to be more independent or to splurge on more things (knowing that you've built up that steady annuity stream).

Eh. People can talk politics on another site if they want.

Well, that last part is a bit of a diversion into psychobabble that doesn't make any sense, so we'll just set that to the side and properly ignore it. In the meantime, what you can't seem to separate is the difference between being a fan of the game of baseball, which means appreciating it in all of Abner Doubleday's intended glory, and being a fan of a team. When you actually select a team to follow and support, it seems very odd that the team's success evidenced through winning wouldn't be at the top of your priority list. Otherwise, why bother being a fan of a team? Just put on random baseball games and enjoy watching two teams play with no interest in the outcome.

A. J. played very smart and with tremendous intensity. However, I never thought that he was a dirty player, and I loved him. My perception is that they are no at all the same kind of players, nor do they have the same character, as human beings.

Besides this thread, is this an issue anywhere else?

They have had several rebuilds over the years that resulted in no titles. I don't think it's fair to say a successful season has to include a championship. If that's the standard, everyone is going to be unhappy most of the time. But there is no guarantee here. Just because it worked for the Cubs and Astros, doesn't mean it will work for the White Sox. Different people making decisions, different players. You can give me and a top chef the same ingredients to make a cake, and I know they won't come out the same. So change everything, and what happens? My question is, using an old JR scenerio....if a guy can't get you from point B to point C, why on earth do you even consider he can get you from point A to point C?

I can't stop laughing at this:

The Cubs rebuilt for 100 years. Tanking didn't support that much. They just had better baseball people making better decisions during this rebuild and they spent money on international signings (arbatraging existing rules, etc). They rebuilt quickly because they made amazing draft decisions, lucked out on a trade (Arrietta) and spent money on many solid FA acquisitions + international FA signings and combined it with an improved developmental team + coaching staff.

I agree with this and it is hard to have revionist history, but it really was an inept failure by the existing management team to not be able to build around the trio of players you mentioned under those affordable contracts. They tried to win and go for it, etc, but they flat out made the wrong moves. Period. It isn't as if you couldn't have made the right moves. Now I'm not saying I would have done better or it would have been easy, but the outcome could have been much different. Even now, I laugh at how easy everyone thinks a rebuild is. Blow it up and miraculously get better. Yes, a few teams have hit the reset button recently with pretty immediate success, but a long term historical view of the baseball world indicates to me that such an outcome isn't necessarily as likely.

How many years did it take doing it the normal way? 80+ years? The Cubs rebuilt and within the same decade had a WS and 4 consecutive playoff trips, with more possible coming up. But sure, lightning in a bottle was genius on the Sox part. Their 4 playoff trips took 25 years.

I've had a few crowns done over the past few years and that's how they do it. Temporary and then the permanent. They will size you for the permanent and then they usually have to special order it.

JR signed Albert Belle. Told Krause to get Dennis RodmanI don't think acting like an ass would make him flinch. What could make him flinch is his comments about hustling. To be honest with you, it would make me wonder exactly how locked in he will be once he gets $300 million guaranteed. But it isn't my money. Sign him.

Jas, I edited just to fix your spelling!

who?

If it was, then Bruce needs to learn to hang up on the caller and proceed by shutting the fuck up until he can confirm it, not continue the conversation.

Yeah I was referring to trading our remaining $ for a prospect or two with either BAL or MIA since they're both in the sweepstakes.

So rebuilds happen and sometimes they are painful, but I still kinda think Steverson should be fired.

Yeah it was a doppelganger thing but even then, trout seems so much bigger than engel in the batter box. I never really saw it.

If they extend him, great. That solves a question and moves his window back.

The contract amount doesn't matter for players on revenue sharing payees that haven't exceeded the tax. If Abreu plays out next season with the Sox, he'll be eligible for a Qualifying Offer after 2019. If they offered him the QO (somewhere between $18-$20) and he turned it down, the Sox would get a draft pick after Competitive Balance Round B regardless of the contract he signs.

Saw a lot of Dodgers fan on Facebook hoping they wouldn't re-sign him. They mentioned his attitude and way he plays the game. He honestly doesn't seen like the kind of guy who would sign here unless we outbid the next offer from a competitor by a solid $20mill at least. Also seems like the kind of player who would sign a massive contract and coast. Not sure hes the type of guy you give the big contract to.

You are the rare fan who rarely if ever blasts the front office or expresses displeasure of any kind. If your patience is rewarded with year after year of excellence you will have the last laugh on a lot of people who are angry now. The rest of us complainers will enjoy the winning years as well.

2005, you mean how Mark Buehrle, Jon Garland, Paul Konerko, Joe Crede, Aaron Rowand, Carlos Lee (traded for Scott Podsednik), Miguel Olivo, Jeremy Reed (Traded for Garcia), how those guys were all developed out of the strong, top-ranked White Sox system from 2000, which famously followed a "White Flag Trade" in the middle of a season and 2 years where the team's slogan was "The Kids Can Play" (several of those kids were key contributors on said world series roster)? So basically you're all in favor of a rebuild and the greatest thing that a team can do is the "White Flag Trade" as that wound up still being key even if, down the line, it wound up contributing Cotts to that roster? Ok, great. Build the system, then you should have a 5-8 year period where the team is very good most years and can have everything go right one year. Yeah I know, banging head against a wall. The team he praised literally existed and was able to be good most years because of tanking, because of rebuilding, because of the White Flag Trade and because The Kids Can Play. He won't care, he won't pay attention, he'll repeat the exact same garbage in another thread, and I hate myself for replying.

Listen to Machado talk about not being a guy who hustles: "That's just not the kind of player I am". Wow!! All of those ex-player commentators made excuses for him. That's fine. I hope he signs somewhere else. I'm afraid that I'm just too "old school". It's hard enough to accept this entire culture of guys with their multi-million dollar, per year contracts, and their swinging for the fences, without having to listen to such prima donna BS. He is a talented player, but not my kind of player. He's just a little too "cool" and full of himself, for my taste, especially if he is going to cost $350 Million.

That is actually unnecessarily insulting to one of the more kinder and thoughtful posters on this board.

You can always watch The Man in the High Castle. And Greg has a point about the "boring" factor of a 162 game schedule with most of the games started by relievers and hours' worth of pitching changes and commercial breaks. Not to mention the fall off in attendance/revenues related to the bottom 1/3rd (maybe 8-12) of teams not having a realistic chance to even make the playoffs at the beginning of the year. That's why the NBA/NHL model is something they're going to have to look at (in terms of half the teams making the playoffs)...with a 154 or even 140 or 146 game schedule. Yes, it's sacrilegious to purists and will throw off the single-season records, but they're going to have to do something eventually because attention spans are just not that long anymore for young people.

Moncada has never been diagnosed with ADD. Some scout insinuated he could have it and Levine reported that. Now, with telephone media being played, people are acting like he does. That's another problem on Levine's part. When you throw shit at the will it often turns into something else. This isn't a leak. This is a scout gossiping his speculation based on nothing to a silly reporter. ADHD isn't even recognized as a condition anymore IIRC. It's just ADD now. Not that that that changes anything in this conversation. Levine referred to it attention deficit syndrome. That was never a thing to begin with.

“Rutherford looks like yellich” is the new Engel looks like “Mike Trout”

I think anytime now is a good time to give her your class ring to go steady.