LDF

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:26 PM) That isn't a personal attack, it's questioning your logic. He's asking for your rationale/defense on why we should go with those types of players. yeah right, if he was questioning the logic, then he should have posted it without my name attached, further more, there was someone else, why did he need to address me out. that was a rhetorical question. now past post of other topics does present a recurring theme. so he has used this forum as a way to attack .... that is how i am coming to my conclusion. i believe i have establish myself as a posters who can take when i am wrong, without any venom spewing. in fact i go out of my way so no one can accuse me of this.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:16 PM) How many DH's do you want on the team? If LaRoche is going to be platooned it's going to be with somebody else already on the roster. They are not going to use 3 spots for 1B/DH types. lets see, there were 2 poster who mention this, and yet you took it upon yourself to attack me. not only really petty but extremely childish. how old are you?????

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:13 PM) He's not advocating he would trade Anderson for Ethier. The question is, trade options that wouldn't cost Anderson or Fulmer. yup, I made that mistake I am not game trading Anderson.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:11 PM) If they are drafting better, all the more reason to keep them and let them come to the majors as a White Sox player. The alternative is much harder - keep trading young players away for veteran hitters and/or using free agency to sign veteran hitters. These options haven't worked. Let's try a long-term approach. Develop our own talent. and you o have a valid point, but the window of opportunity is limited time. the sox needs to make one fell swoop in getting those missing pieces to fix the team

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:59 PM) Can Ethier still play CF 100+ games? Not sure we'd want to keep moving Eaton from a corner to CF and back again on a daily basis. i don't know, i am not game in trading him for anderson.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:58 PM) Agreed. I have been against the approach of signing free agents year after year because of their inability to develop position players, but they can't say they wan to go for it while Chris Sale is in his prime, and then leave so many gaping holes when some of them could be addressed in free agency AND in one season, they do drop $25+ million off the payroll when Danks/La Roche are up. I'm sure they could find a way to get creative, and pay a free agent less money in year one, but make up for it the back of the deal and/or give that player an option to opt-out early. they have been drafting way better, esp in the hitter dept. with hahn, i fully trust that problem will be fixed in the future. but the problem in now in the interim.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:53 PM) Playing only against righties as well. and that is a good point, then they to FO would have to sign someone even if it mean platooning, as i said earlier.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:44 PM) That happens when you develop pitching well. Hitting on the other hand....I'll leave it at that. can you imagine if they were able to get 25% of that success in hitting. but no matter how good of instruction you have, they have to draft well. that has improve a lot.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:47 PM) The Sox obviously aren't banking on him returning to what he should be, or they wouldn't have been trying to trade him (wish cash, that is). If he doesn't bounce back, there will be plenty of guys that they can plug into the DH role throughout the season. Avi, Melky, etc. I would imagine the thinking is hope for the best and prepare for the worst. ok lets assume you are right, melky already has a position and if you pencil TT as a full time of'er, then why did then wanted to see if there was interest in trading him and / or if he is full time, then avi will be the dh. that is all i can see unless you are thinking of shuck.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:46 PM) In all seriousness, I have no idea what you are talking about anymore. You keep posting stuff, and then later saying that isn't what you said. Apparently I am not the only one who feels that way either. Call it petty or whatever, but I have no idea you mean most of the time. I give up trying to respond to it with any substance. ok show me today where i contradicted myself.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:39 PM) I think 2016 is a year in development. Get Rodon/EJ more IP/experience, get Thompson/ Sanchez/Saladino more atbats to see if they progress, keep Lawrie at 3B to see if he can get back to his pre-injury self, Avi- don't know what the f*** to say about him. Using 2016 as a year to develop gives the Sox a chance to see what they have in the majors and minors. After 2016 they will have a better idea and both Danks/LaRoche salaries off the books so they will be in better shape to take on more salary through trades. Also, most of the Sox minor league talent is at AA or below so allowing a year of development gives Sox minor leaguers more time to develop which will raise their values for next off season. Another year gives Montas and Fulmer time to develop so if one or both show they are ready, then the Sox can trade one or two of Sale/Q/EJ. Next off seasons FA pitching market is horrible so that's when the Sox should strike and go for the " haul " that's been discussed so often. If the Sox can stay patient for just one more season things would really line up well for next off season to put out a legit contender for '17 and beyond. The Royals are still riding high and the Twins are rising ast so let them have their moment in the sun, for 2016 anyway. i agree, beside developmental, but a yr of new players getting bounded or use to a new environment.

QUOTE (South Sider @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:24 PM) At this point, I'd rather keep Laroche. Like others have said, he is the perfect bounce back candidate, and if he does in fact bounce back, will be much more attractive to teams during the season. I just hope the Sox plans this offseason aren't contingent on moving Laroche. That would be terrible. let me play devil's advocate, what happen if he does not bounce back, the sox will not have any one to manned that position.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:19 PM) He would cost both Anderson and Fulmer, and likely more you do have a point, i can't even imagine what the cost would be like.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 07:06 PM) Not sure I see the Sox trading for Frazier or signing Upton/Cespedes unless the prices come down, so who are some viable trade targets for the White Sox that wouldnt cost them Tim Anderson or Carson Fulmer? A name I've been interested in is Martin Prado. You'd only be trading for a year of him so the price wouldnt be all that high, solid OBP that could fit in the 2 hole, low K%, excellent defensively at 3B, could be a real nice table setter for Abreu, has some versatility in that he can play 2B and 3B as well....I think he would present a nice option for the Sox. for me, dee gordon miami.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:28 PM) Honestly, I think the problem is I have no idea what you are saying in these posts, because I see you're contradicting everything I think you say in the next one. I give up. good b/c it doesn't become you to berate me on some really petty B/S. going to the can't understand card and contradiction. i have yet to contradict anything in what i have said. believe me and if not, who cares. i never knew you to be like this contradiction stuff.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:23 PM) It's come up before, but if the Sox want to acquire Frazier and Anderson has to be involved, I'm alright with that on the condition they sign one of the premier OF's on the market to go along with the Frazier acquisition. But as many have said, just acquiring Frazier and Lawire and calling it an offseason would make me more upset than if they did nothing. At that point you gave up pieces of your future for what seems like an 81 win finish. If you're going to go for it, go for it all in. If you want just to just fill holes and build for the future, that's ok too, but don't fall in the middle. i totally agree, they would have to have a bigger pkg for a bigger trade.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:10 PM) Sadly, I agree as well. It would be different if Frazier was a bonafide stud or something. Not trading for him means we're not going to compete next year. This is going to be a long, dreadful season. not necessarily, so if the sox don't trade for him, it doesn't mean that they may not explore other options.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:10 PM) Pre-K schooling is very important, and I think it gets underutilized and underappreciated. I say that having under-appreciated it myself before. I'll be honest and say, because my wife and I both worked full time, we just saw Day Care as only that. But we did pick a school we really liked, and looking back I am soooooo glad we invested in a place that was truly a school versus just a day care. It costs a lot - about $1600/month per kid, which over 5 years is like a college education - but it has been amazing what they do. Finding the right pre-K school is key. We did what a lot of Chicago couples do. Lived in the city when married, and for the first kid. Second kid was being discussed, running out of room and had school concerns, so we moved to Northbrook. Property taxes are about 4k/year more than our city condo, but that is far, far less than private school tuition. And the public schools here are excellent. also think this..... security.... how much is that worth??? this is one story i will repeat. i grew up tough. i was in 5th grade, i went to the boy club on 24th. i was in involve in a situation where i was stabbed and i did some other things. they were against a group call the youngs blah.. blahh. i was force to go to some other place for 1 1/2 yrs without my parents.... the main point is security of the child in a nice educational system.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 06:03 PM) I think we're at the point now that we can figure on LaRoche being a part of the White Sox in 2016. And as others have said, he is a perfect bounce back candidate. Even after his horrible 2015 season, he's still a .260 career hitter. I'm not saying that he gets back to that, but if he hit .240+ with 20+ HRs while playing a decent 1st base at times, I'll take it. Compared to his career numbers, 2015 stands out as an outlier, no question. There's more going for him to return to more career-like numbers than to repeat 2015. All that being said, I would imagine (and hope) that Hahn will still look to add a big bat by shifting some of the cost to beyond 2016 when LaRoche and Danks come off the books. you may have a good point, i would still find if anything a platoon player, just in case he doesn't get any better.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:31 PM) You are saying "continue improving this team", while ignoring that the team is doing exactly that. As I said previously they have improved at C and 3B, and are still looking to improve in other places. The proof in that is both in the team statements, and in the rumors that keep popping up with the Sox name in them. Centering the argument that LaRoche's status somehow means the team isn't trying to improve is 100% WRONG. i have never said anything of what the sox have done, already. geeze. i am saying i will wait to see if they continue to improve, via the FO statement of on 20 mil to spend. and pls quit trying to put words into my mouth so you can get a long anger feed thread going. i never said b/c of laroche contract, the sox shouldn't improve. actually you implied that but, "oh he is a good bounce back project" it is you who would not do anything b/c he is a bounce back player. i am saying who cares, improve that position anyway. smell the bull s*** you are shoveling.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:49 PM) The mystery is in that prime zone for Tim Anderson right now. I will have to be told what the thing is that he projects to do at elite level. I do not see it. If you have a whiz fielder then all this is great......but you risk a lot if that does not come into focus for him. "2 yr rental" minimizes how damn good Frazier is. It has been said here before but Frazier plus an OF signing gets us right where we want to be for win-now. The Sox have to win to get the Reinsdorfs interested in pushing payroll up from year to year. We need to get more people in the seats and win games, especially since the current projections for the Central are not daunting, actually. Trading Anderson preserves Fulmer and Adams, as well as lower level guys. So - strike now then the sox will need to fix the product to justify the cost of spending the money.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:35 PM) The problem is for the amount of offense they need and the price to get it is either going to be using a starting pitcher to get multiple pieces, trade prospects , or spend a bunch of money. The Sox are stuck on a fine line cause the starting pitching is very good and to trade from it will take away from the team. Trading a bunch of prospects witb a thin farm system will set you back. Sox opening up the money purse to get free agents might end up hampering you with a big contract . Unfortunately to fix most of it would be a full rebuild but they don't want to. So the dilemma goes on within what you are stating, i agree for the most part. but their is a happy medium and only hahn will need to find it. we as fans do not have the open communication that is needed to make a better decision or better call.

i have stated this several times before in how i grew up and the problems i encounter including the point of children being hurt at school ..... so as i said, this school down here is like an baptist academy, from 2 yr preschool till 8th grade. they ask for the parents to come in and help in the sports aspect of the school, baseball, boy / girls, football, soccer etc.... but that is done by parents, but they concertate of education. i like this program.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 04:18 PM) The religious part of this equation I could live without. I don't believe there is a pre-requisite to have religion involved in any way in a quality education. Are there overlapping values that both share? Of course. yeah so could i, but down here, a very different baptist school has a great program, but they teach their religion and the bible. but the educational part is great.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:16 PM) I can't count the ways that this post is wrong. LaRoche is a sunk cost, and no one else wants him. You literally have nothing to lose, and a 30 homer guy to gain if he can get back to where he was before. LaRoche has a myriad of things going against him last year, and is a prime bounceback candidate. If he still doesn't hit, you can cut him later. Once you cut him, you can't get him back. This team is continuing to try to improve. Just because LaRoche hasn't been cut quick enough for you, doesn't disqualify the other improvements the team has already made this winter. They are already better at 3b and C. They are also still trying to bring in another bat. bold #1 - i agree and i have stated that. bold #2 - so should the sox not try to improve that position, there is no guarantee he will bounce back and for me, too much of a gamble esp if the sox do nothing else. bold #3 - he is a pro player of how many yrs???? and he needs to be babied. bold #4 - i never said nor implied of cutting him. i am saying to continue improving this team. bold #5 - continuing to improve. you are making a generalization here or are hoping. until something else is done, there is no proof anything else is forth coming until it happens. so unless you have the in"s with the FO you, just like all of us are hoping that they will continue to improve.