maggsmaggs

http://www.premier-ortho.com/patient-educa...-transposition/ Three months would take him to the end of January whereas the six-month extreme would be the end of April.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 04:17 PM) illinoisloyalty.com cracks me up. Some guy posts a stupid picture of the chief logo with some comment like "everyone be happy" and the whole board thinks a commitment is coming. These are probably grown ass men acting like little school girls over a vague post. Sports fans are weird. I have only been reading Loyalty for a few months, but the guy who posted the Chief logo has done so right before the announcement of other commitments. He apparently has sources. That's why they get giddy. Whether or not he actually has sources or not is up for the debate.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 21, 2013 -> 01:55 PM) Unless the Bears crater into a top 5 pick, Cutler will be back next year. The prudent thing to do would be franchise Cutler and draft a guy in the top three rounds. By all accounts this year will be the deepest QB draft in years. Maybe not the sure-fire too end guys like Luck or RGIII but lots of skilled guys. You could get a guy like Mettenbeger in round 3 or hell Aaron Murray or even Johnny Football.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Oct 19, 2013 -> 09:08 AM) The Cardinals didn't really let Pujols go. They offered him a ten year deal at 22 mil per year. They just got lucky that the Angels offered Pujols even more money. Yeah, I totally forgot how that all went down. Good call.

Saw this in an article: So how about the Cuban BB. Stays with weapon theme sort of.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 19, 2013 -> 07:10 AM) http://www.baseballamerica.com/majors/ask-...e-braves-do-it/ Same can be said for the Cardinals. Draft well and develop well. Easier said than done. But both teams have teams full of homegrown players and then supplement them with solid free agent signings. Management also has cohones. They let Pujols go so that 1/4 of their payroll was not tied to one player and look what they have done in the post-Pujols era.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 18, 2013 -> 12:59 PM) I'm no expert or anything, but if it's only a choice between those two, I'd go Gatewood. More power, and upside. Could be a 3B long term. I would go the opposite, but definitely understand your opinion. I like Turner. He is a legit SS with excellent athleticism. Because he is such a good fielder with top-line speed, he at worst is a solid starting SS in the major leagues. If he hits like he has shown when healthy, he is a 6-8 WAR player annually -- maybe more. My main reason with him over Gatewood is that you just can't miss having a pick so high. Gatewood might have 40 HR power, but he is far more likely to bust than Turner. Plus, there are many questions about his future position. The one negative to Turner is that he sounds like Beckham (not skillset) but in that he is a guarantee to be a MLB starter for years to come and well Beckham has definitely been a bust.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFan05 @ Oct 17, 2013 -> 08:44 PM) Jon Heyman seconds that Texas is in. He just said what knobler and Sullivan say Texas in. He didn't say he had independent info.

The Cigar cuz he lights the ball up.

I'd have to imagine that Abreu's agent now will give teams time to up their bids. I am sure it is his camp stating White Sox at $70 million. Teams know what they have to bid over to get into the game.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 17, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) Rogers for Jamal Charles? Aaron? Whose on your roster? Are you getting Charles? Need way more info but gut says whomever is getting Charles is winning the deal.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 16, 2013 -> 03:10 PM) Olney just tweeted that Abreu's deal could be up to 70 million and that the Astros White Sox and Rangers are the front runners. Ill do 6/70 Man that is a lot of money for such an unproven one-way player. But a Abreu-Garcia-Viciedo middle of the order could be dynamic if they meet their potential.

Thank god for the Chiefs' D 27 points. Up 23 with my opponent having Nick Novak. Single digit games from Cobb, Bryant, Martin, Romo and Cameron were not good. Luckily playing an opponent who had AP stink and various others.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) Need to play one: Justin Blackmon, Vincent Jackson, TY Hilton, Nate Washington. Currently have Blackmon in the lineup. Blackmon. Gonna pile up yards in garbage time -- which might be three quarters' worth.

I have a really solid starting lineup, so I have been bench stashing, but soon will need to drop one. Help me decide: Vereen Andre Brown Harvin. GO

This is exactly what a retooling or rebuilding team needs: a 33 – year – old outfielder when the season starts whose WAR has declined the past two years. It does not seem like Granderson will be that much better than De Aza next year. And when you consider the price tag for Granderson based on name alone, De Aza it seems like the more economical player.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 4, 2013 -> 04:09 PM) If you remember back to pre-GM Kenny Williams, this IS what he is really good at. When he was in charge of just the minor league system, it was tops in baseball. Top ranked but it didn't produce like it though. But I agree we have had good young players that we traded away (Morse, Gio, Hudson etc.). KW should def be a voice in the org just not THE FINAL VOICE. Let the more pragmatic Hahn be that. And let's never draft another former college football player.

I am convinced there is no "right" mentality to manage. Some players perform better for aggressive managers and some perform better for relaxed managers. Both styles have their pluses and minuses.

Traded Luck for Kapernick. Also have Romo who had more favorable match ups than Luck. So was planning on Romo most weeks so thought Luck was expendable and Kap was a good buy-low.

De Aza is not a great player by any stretch of the imagination, but a he is cheap and has two 2-plus WAR seasons under his belt. For the $3 millio ish he will probably make in 2014, he is probably worth keeping.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 30, 2013 -> 10:04 AM) Aren't those numbers entirely set by their draft position and the international caps? The caps are, but you don't have to actually spend it.

My favorite part from the article. Here is where Hahn and KW seem to differ. Whereas KW would spend every dime on the ML club and in fact take money from the International FA/Amateur draft pool of the Club, Hahn allocates a significant portion to them and won't subtract. Now it worked in 2005 and Iguchi/AJ probably were signed with draft/international FA money, I much rather Hahn's approach of less salary for the ML club and more player development. I really trust Hahn.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 27, 2013 -> 06:55 AM) Considering the Sox are the ones developing him, and not the "many scouts", I'd say it is pretty important how the Sox view him. I'm only talking about these lists. Not real life importance.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 26, 2013 -> 01:29 PM) No, his role really isn't in flux the Sox did everything they could to make him a long term starter but they weren't going to pile 50 more innings onto a full season in high school innings for a kid that young. They literally had him pitching every 5th day out of the bullpen with a normal throwing schedule in-between. That's how insistent they are on making him a starter, they even put him through the routine of being a starter. That said, if you compare him to someone who was used as a starter this year already, then fine, you under-rank him and the rankings really aren't that useful. Sox view him a starter but many scouts don't believe he can use at motion and be a starter. How the Sox view him is irrelevant.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 26, 2013 -> 09:19 AM) Was hoping for a bit higher, but not bad. Could only be that scouts don't believe he can be a long-term starter. Stuff and stats are clearly there, but role is in flux.