Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 12:51 PM) I dont think the election has changed anything. The discussion about the election results focused on Trump saying he would not accept it. Hillary accepted it, Hillary asked people to move on. Now people have the right to protest, they have the right to be heard. I have personally told many people that protesting on Weds after the election is stupid. The time to be heard was Monday, or anytime in the last year prior to the election. The second line is where the problem is. Who on Obama's staff was "radical." I dont recall Obama appointing anyone close to Bannon, I dont recall Obama appointing anyone who ran a newspaper who gave Obama favorable coverage. Or for that matter, I dont remember Obama not putting his assets in a blind trust, I dont remember Obama not providing his tax returns. So for once, can we just have an actual apples to apples comparison? Or are people just so hell bent in supporting "their" guy, that they dont even care about the truth anymore. Because Im fine in either world, I have no problem sinking down and getting dirty. It really isnt that hard to be the Breitbarts of the world. Don't protest the election, protest the actions. As badger says, if you don't believe in Bannon, get out and have your voice heard...write your representatives, use your voice in a peaceful manner. Get the message out. Protesting the results of the election is a right, but one I don't necessarily agree with because the action happened. Protest what he does and make sure everyone knows what you feel strongly about or what you don't. I don't know if you guys saw it or not, but the day after the election, TNT's NBA crew talked about the game and I thought they did a great job as a whole, especially Ernie Johnson (although I thought they all did a good job). I think it was shared a bit on facebook, although I happened to watch it live and think that they nailed it better then almost any talking head I've seen on CNN / Fox News / etc.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 12:27 PM) The problem is that no one wants to hold themselves accountable anymore. A lot of the same people have posted on this board for a long time, almost everyone of them I have argued with about something at some point. It didnt matter if they were Republican/Democrat, what mattered is if "I" thought they were right or wrong. If a Democrat says something that is wrong, out of line, not supported by the evidence, I dont just turn a blind eye. But what is the point if no one else is willing to do it? Now I know its not every Republican, but when someone like Bannon is picked, EVERYONE should be shouting it down. I understand that trying to convince people about free trade, restriction of movement of labor is not that easy and I even understand that there can be a difference of opinion on policy. But there are people on this board who dont even acknowledge that there is a problem with Bannon, and at some point each party needs to start self policing. Because at the end of the day, we are all judged by the company that we keep, and right now for the Republican's that company is Bannon. I can only speak for myself, but Bannon is a deal breaker. I agree with everything you said.

It is interesting to see all this panic over who is going to be in the Trump administration and all the chaos, when it has barely been two weeks. Obama announced his first cabinet member 3 weeks after winning (I believe) and that was faster then the 3 previous presidents by a lot.

QUOTE (peavy44 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 11:29 AM) If we don't get moncada and andrew bentrilln no deal. I have my fingers crossed that Boston gets to that point and a combination of Texas, Houston, Washington, and the Braves drive them there. Dodgers will be in it, but ultimately I think they settle for a lesser package for Q (more in the case that they could get Q without giving up Urias and I do think they have enough other prospects that they could make it happen).

I think Sale will go to Boston and I think Q will go to the Dodgers. I see Q to the Dodgers because they will find a way to get him without giving up Urias (still a strong package) and they are the type of front office who will truly appreciate how good of a pitcher Q is. Sale will go to the Red Sox because when push comes to shove, Dombrowski has the chips and wants to win and knows that Sale will help him do that in the near-term (and he isn't afraid to best other teams offers, when all is set and done).

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:33 AM) Hub ARkush was on yesterday and said that the Patriots asking price for Garoppolo is Two #1's plus other stuff. If that is the case, no way.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:32 AM) I'm thinking Romo may have a Kurt Warner-esque resurgence with another team. Couple injury plagued years and then one magical injury free year where he is Romo again. I think we are headed in the direction of having a really good defense. I've seen flashes despite having a lousy secondary (CB's and safety). We still have some needs, but I've also seen a lot out of our younger defensive players.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:24 AM) No, I don't think continuity is ever that bad. My main gripe with Fox has been his handling of injuries. His game day stuff I knew would be case, and he promoted from within and this time it burned him. But I still think he has eye for coaching talent. Jim Bob Cooter was on our list for QB coach but went to lions. We could have went Gase -> Cooter and been much better off. I'm not at all ready to kick Fox to the curb. I want continuity and Fox has shown he is a more then capable coach with a good eye for talent when it comes to assistants. A lot of games to go but I think we are seeing our defense improve a ton.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:18 AM) I think it's going to happen. He has the EIU connection with Pace. I'd take 2 years of Romo while they develop a young QB. They could still take a young QB high. I think it makes sense because they have another draft and close to $80 million in cap space. A few additions in the secondary and this could be a top 5 unit on defense. They will some win now pieces so starting Romo would be fine. They just need a QB in the pipeline. Some have argued that it's no different than keeping Cutler but I disagree. Romo is better. I've been a Cutler supporter for a long time but it's time for both parties to move on. Yep. I think we will make a push too and I am absolutely okay with it as long as we bring in that developmental QB. I also am absolutely okay giving up a second and a future pick for a Jimmy G or maybe seeing if the Patriots are interested in getting Brady a receiver like Alshon in a package for Jimmy G. I am skeptical about using a top 5 pick on a QB in this years draft (not sure what is out there) but we clearly have an immediate need to make a change. If we thought Tony was healthy, I'd absolutely make that move (but we can't ignore finding a young QB to develop under him).

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:13 AM) Honestly, I read your first sentence and I don't know how that is at all what I said. I'm not calling half the country disgusting. But just because there are some Trump voters that have seen their towns pop decrease and jobs go away does not mean that we should be silent that their vote empowered some very terrible people. I may be incapable of making that point, but I am not calling people inherently evil for voting for trump. But their vote for trump put some very bad people in office, despite very obvious evidence that this was the case. Edit: I read the rest of your post and largely agree. But I think both can be done. I and others can be a watchdog, criticize the clinton campaign, and acknowledge that nearly half the country voted for a person appointing absolute nuts to important positions and not be wrong in any of them. Maybe there's too much focus on point 3, it's week 2. Gotcha, I might have read it different, but I agree with what your rephrase above.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:03 AM) The idea that after 8 years "change" is going to be a winning recipe is absolutely true. There is a reason we have only seen the incumbent party win after 8 years of rule from previous president 3 times in last 100 years. It is obvious Clinton was a bad candidate for Change message. But that "change" was the recipe for success among this man that was so clearly corrupt beyond Clinton, ill-prepared, ill-tempered, unbothered, and fomenting racism, xenophobia and bigotry for so many people doesn't absolve them from the responsibility of that decision. Are the very vocal, very terrible people the majority of those who voted for trump? No. But they are a much bigger and powerful group than they would be with any other Repub president. They are becoming cabinet officials. Was this obvious prior to his election. YES. So should we human shield all of the people who voted trump by saying they aren't horrible people? I guess I just don't care. Whether they just wanted to vote against clinton or are a white nationalist voting for trump, they voted for very powerful positions to go to very horrible people. And we all pay. Do I want their votes again? Yes. But the 5 million americans who didn't vote may be a better place to start. If you want to just go and call half of the country disgusting, go right ahead, but lets see what good that does solving any problems in our country. It makes you no different then the other side. Hillary should have spent more time attacking the issues and talking about how she was going to drive change and make the country better. I didn't vote for Trump, but I'm not going to call everyone who voted for Trump disgusting (misguided, absolutely), but deep down, I hope somehow they weren't so wrong and Trump ends up being a fantastic president. If he doesn't, then people should use their voice and let it be heard so that everyone understands why his policies are wrong and what he is doing is wrong. But for all those people protesting who didn't cast a vote, I hope they all learn a lesson and cast a vote in the future. And when you say they voted for very powerful positions to go to very horrible people, lets not forget that there was a lot of people who didn't think all that highly of Clinton and could even have gone as far as calling her pretty horrible. So in many people's eyes it was picking the less horrible and some people viewed that as being Trump, others saw it as Clinton, others clearly didn't vote.

Who is ready for the Bears to sign Tony Romo in the offseason?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 08:55 AM) I spent the entire election say that a large part of the country just wanted something different. I think the obvious take away is that neither party gave the electorate exactly what they wanted, and that if either party had nominated even a slightly more palatable candidate to the middle of America, they would have trounced the other party in this election. The people gave a pretty clear message in this election, both who they voted for, and with how many people stayed home. Hopefully both parties are listening. And posts like Balta's would make me think that one side doesn't get it and on the republican side, this whole mandate also would lead me to believe they largely don't get it. Will be very interesting to see what happens these next couple of years. I hope the actual stuff people push through largely aligns to things that a majority of the country believes make sense. On healthcare Trump seems to have taken a step to fall that way (but none of us know for sure) and similarly on potentially on things like gay marriage. That said, there are other things that are still way out there / open.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 08:49 AM) If it were Rubio, Kasich or Jeb in Trump's spot, I'd agree. But people condoned bigotry with their votes this election, there's no real way around that. If it were any of those three candidates, you wouldn't have had any of these discussions anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 08:05 PM) This is why they got elected, at least as much as the electoral college. They told people it's ok to be bigots and that excited the Republican base. This is his act. This thought is dangerous. It is what Hillary Clinton leveraged and it didn't work. If people believe that is why they got elected, then they are missing the reality of the situation. The election happened because of a combination of things, the bulk of which people wanted serious change. They wanted a change candidate and Trump was who represented the people most in want of change (and even then he got less votes than McCain and Romney). Trump also talked to more people in the rest belt area who have had things get worse over the last 8 years and who wanted a change. Now did those people ignore certain things Donald said / did, absolutely, but to lump in and just assume that everyone who cast there vote for Trump feels the way that you seem to think is just ridiculous and does not solve anything. You saw what good those type of statements did Hillary (calling half of the voting population deplorables doesn't help things). The fact of the matter is everyone lost in this election, but we really lost if the actual politicians don't recognize that the people are fed up and do want change. They want people in the government to work together to come up with things that in general the people want, that will make there lives better. Case closed that a lot of people didn't feel that happened. Bill Clinton himself has been highlighted talking about a lot of these very same things.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 01:42 PM) Steve Bannon sees 20% of silicon valley ceo's being asian, mentally freaks out and interprets this as 75%, winds up saying that having large numbers of asians in those roles is bad for civic society. Remember folks, it's not just the muslims, brown people, blacks, and jews. They'll get down the list to hating you personally eventually. Under no circumstances, should Bannon be associated with the White house. Trump needs to get his act together. The nationalist sentiments coming from the campaign is always what terrified me the most about Trump.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 11:12 AM) Yeah it depends on location for sure. I saw if you took out the poorest 20% and the richest 20% you get a range for middle class from 47k-140k Damn...that has to be right cause it fits pretty squarely in my range. Feels about right.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 10:58 AM) I see Middle class anywhere from 25-75k depending on location. I must look at things differently, I view middle class as being 75-125K. Lower mid of 50-75K and upper mid of like $125-$200K (might even go higher). But again, I might have the same issue as Sqwert as the median home in the county I live in is $661K. Two teachers teaching in the district I live in (with a masters) are getting somewhere between $140-$160 (obviously this is a dual income) per year.

I figure Swihart is a given throw-in in any deal. If I'm the Sox, the best deal is if I can get other teams to drive price up enough that the Red Sox throw both Benintendi & Moncada in the same deal. I don't know if it will happen, but I'm hoping it gets to that point. This would appear to be the type of market where we could potentially get an overpay, that said, teams are so against giving up their prospects in this day and age. Dombrowski isn't shy. I don't think the Dodgers will happen (even though they clearly have the parts) because I think Friedman won't have the stones to do what Dombrowski is willing to do. We shall see though.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:37 AM) We need to honestly do a full-scale rebuild, and ultimately what needs to happen is we need to come out of it with a lot of young, talented depth. If you look at it trade by trade, you are going to win a few, lose a few, maybe lose one or two badly, maybe win a few badly, but in the end, you need to come out of this with a roster that allows you to put a reasonably talented product on the field for far less than what you are paying now. To bother getting much more specific about it now is just a wasted effort, imho. I agree with you and I also agree with you that we then need to leverage some free agent money into shorter term deals that we can use to provide short term veteran presence which can be spun at the deadline to continue to build up talent pool.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:14 AM) Either spending a lot of money or trading a couple of these guys, but you cannot miss. It has to be an outstanding trade or you will be bad for a long time. It isn't like they have guys at the lower levels who just need a couple of years until they are stars. I don't think the trade has to be outstanding. Quite frankly, we've already been bad for a long time. I think if the trade is even fair / good, it could work out in our best interest, because we could have a more complete team with more people contributing on a nightly basis. It is unlikely we will get back any player who will be as good as Chris Sale. The people who say Urias will be better is pure BS. Maybe, sure, but Christopher Sale has been the second best pitcher in baseball over the past five years...so the odds of us getting a guy who is better then that are slim to none. That said, if we can get multiple contributors, ideally one above average and another well above average, then I think that would be a good trade and if we could have a few of those happen, plus bring in our own talent from (hopefully improved drafts / development), then we can be in a much better position. I'd rather be a good team, looking to acquire a star to push us over the top then be in the position where we are in where we need all kinds of help. I see no way to contend without breaking this down a bit. I agree to succeed, we will have to win these trades, but I don't know the alternative. We have tried to half ass it for a while and it has done nothing.

Butler thus far this season has taken his game to another level. Dude has been a model of efficiency thus far. Helps that on this team, you know who is going to get the ball late in the game and who the "alpha's" are vs. last years team where you had Rose, Pau, Butler, and even Noah (when he was on the court) all used to being at one point a top player. The problem was, most of them weren't anything close to it anymore, but they had that "expectation", which created so much of the clubhouse distractions. If Grant plays D like he did last night, then he could have more of a future in this league then we thought. Still, one game, but obviously the guy has some talent. If he somehow pans out, then that Rose trade will look even better.

I like reading this kind of articles, especially since I'm clearly Jimmy Butler's biggest fan on this site. Total fluff piece, but I am glad that we are still getting fluff pieces at this point in the season, haha. http://www.espn.com/blog/chicago-bulls/pos...s-back-together

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 08:59 AM) The one thing I struggle with is why the Alexandria community isn't ready to pack it up and flee. Seems like instinctually you'd want to get away from a no win situation and take your chances finding another area to inhabit. That was the other option, but I think the problem is, a lot of them are so attached to this as there home and didn't have a track record of really fleeing (they've had to sharpen up under Rick's watch, but still nothing like Rick and crew have gone through). Plus, just think about how many of them there are and how they followed the RV and were there for every move. I presume they figure if they flee, they'll be found and caught. A lot of this though is they are probably all in shock and don't necessarily know what to expect.

QUOTE (MEANS @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 06:19 AM) also some speculation that Daryl was communicating with Rick by blinking morse code to him, we did see the morse code sign/wall hanging in the house. That was my thoughts as well.