Chisoxfn

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Feb 29, 2016 -> 04:25 PM) Im not a huge Trump fan but the David Duke stuff is beyond ridiculous. Now you have Rubio saying things like "Look how small his hands are, and you know what they say about guys with small hands..." Ted Cruz saying hes involved with the mafia. Its funny (and kind of sad) watching these guys sinking to Trumps level out of desperation. Every media outlet and good old boy republican has been attacking him nonstop for days and he just keeps climbing in the polls. It might not help him with the base republicans but some of the stuff he said in the last debate will likely help him with undecideds. He was defending planned parenthood and saying they do great things to help women, and then was getting attacked by Cruz for saying if he was President nobody would die in the streets because they couldnt afford health insurance . Cruz then accused him of "wanting free healthcare for everyone." Its just mind blowing how dumb Rubio and Cruz are. I don't really think it would be that hard for him to make a bold statement. He did so back in 2009 and now he is just grasping at straws for whatever delusional reason he wants to share. The guy is a big fat liar. His first 10 responses when confronted with his lies are lie back or just call the other person a name. Its disgusting. Politics is disgusting and Trump is taking it to a whole nother level. Would anyone want there kids to emulate this sort of behavior? And this is supposed to be the leader of the free world? I like Ben Carson's common quote of bringing the government back to the people. The essence of what is wrong with this country (and by the way, there is still a hell of a lot right about it) is our current political system and how it works from a campaign funding perspective and the sheer bribery. Look at DC and how much money is made by the government (look at average home prices and you'd think you'd be in silicon valley not the government).

Those Rubio / Kasich / Cruz superpacs better put some money together to get the quotes of Trump related to KKK (back in 2009), his absurd comments this weekend, and than his I didn't have a mic (when he clearly responded to the answers by saying david duke's name).

Take that Hoosiers

Yeah - That was a fantastic episode, imo. I don't understand why they are so willing to go to "war" though. I'd have thought they'd have other ways to scavenge food before risking their own lives.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Feb 29, 2016 -> 10:48 AM) If he had any sense he would have taken less to play SS for one year and hope for a rebound. His bat doesn't play in LF, I have no idea why he agreed to do that. I think his bat is fine, but the bat is what makes him far more valuable at short (and it isn't like he's an awful defender). Which is why I presume we could have gotten him for 1Yr 8M and played him at short. Now he may look at the Rangers environment and how hitters have excelled and view it as a way for him to get back on track offensively and then he can slide back in a year from now. However, every decision Ian has made from a contractual perspective has been awful (from turning down his mega deal to turning down his qualifying offer, he has made brutal decisions and/or gotten brutal advice). Boras (who I think is representing him) normally doesn't miss, but what Ian has done has to be the most brutal whiff in player history ever (thus far...maybe he mashes and gets a huge offer a year from now) but I feel bad for the guy. He's lost just a massive amount of money because of his contract decisions.

Think about this for a second, if Rollins makes the big league roster, he will get paid $2M. The Rangers are paying Ian $8. Split the difference and for $6M more (and of course a draft pick) the Sox could have had Ian. Please note, the expectation / hope from the front office perspective appears to be that Rollins will make the team. Now I don't know if Ian would have taken $8M to play with the Sox and remain at shortstop (or if we would have contemplated any scenario where we'd have signed him to play in the outfield).

It is all too little too late. If they attacked Trump like they did last week a month ago, and than had the time and opportunity to continue to attack him, Trump would be gone. He's going to win everything but Texas on Super Tuesday and that is the best possible outcome for him. It keeps Cruz in (we know Kasich is staying) and Rubio isn't going to back out. Its done. Pending some total shocker tomorrow, Trump is the nominee, you can't sell me on any other alternative (unless of course Trump takes Texas).

Draft pick is obviously a consideration, but what a cheap deal for the Rangers.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 02:53 PM) I believe he signed with an agent already when he declared, so no If he doesn't sign, he could just continue to train and re-enter the draft next year (basically just hold out from whichever team drafts him).

I'd still think he goes in the 2nd to 3rd round. Anything past that, I can't imagine he signs.

Doesn't mean he isn't pitching in B games or to our minor leaguers.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 01:40 PM) Sounds like Jeffery is getting a long-term deal to stay in Chicago. Interesting. I know Hoge had reported that Jeffrey was not yet tagged (contrary to Schefty's report).

Ty Lawson and Rockets working on buyout. Lawson has issues, but PG is a major need. Joe Johnson is going to the Heat.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 10:25 AM) Chris Christie to endorse Donald Trump. He must want a job in his administration? Unexpected otherwise.

Joe Johnson officially waived. I presume Bulls would kick the tires. Clearly a shell of his former self, but you have to think going to a contender and getting away from Jersey would potentially help him be more valuable. Cavs widely considered the frontrunner.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 25, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) Agreed. I'm not saying the opt out would have been a good idea. It's just the notion that he only wanted to play for the Cubs and nowhere else is a fairytale. He's still betting on himself to score a big payday in the future, which is why took the Cubs one year deal instead of the Orioles offer. It's similar to the guaranteed money Heyward "passed up". Wouldn't the Sox have had the shot to get the pick back in the following year (presuming they would be comfortable enough to make him a qualifying offer...albeit that means you are willing to give him a hefty pay raise over what you paid him in 16.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Feb 25, 2016 -> 10:33 AM) Baltimore lost pick w/ Gallardo signing. Just means they don't move up in the 2nd. I thought Gallardo didn't sign (failed physical). Or did they end up eventually signing him?

We had marked him off the list when it sounded like he signed with the O's, but sure enough, he never actually did and ended up signing a one year deal with the Cubs. I know there is a thread in diamond club, but given the rumors / ties to him with the Sox, thought it made sense to include here.

RIP. Knew a couple people who knew him and they always raved about what a great guy he was and a huge Sox fan. I always wish he was still involved in the day-to-day. He was a very sharp and successful.

Typical Iowa fashion, peak early and tail late (or so it seems). Hopefully they can get things turned around and quick.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Feb 25, 2016 -> 07:16 AM) Yeah, Bears are in really good shape to overhaul their defense and OL through free agency and the draft with how much cap space and 9 picks (could be more). I'm very excited for this Bears off season. #1 priority is sign Jeffery to a long term deal #2 priority sign Trevathan I'm going to guess Long gets paid heavily sometime this off-season too.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 04:53 AM) Another security protocol that is in place is based on your post. Based on past contributions we have determined that this account may have been breached. Because this post is well written, accurate, and free of grammar and spelling mistakes, we must suspend your account until we can determine this is really Chisoxfn. LOL.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:04 PM) The Republican field is, if nothing else, far more exciting than the Democrat one. It was a huge field, still pretty big, with candidates swigning wildly to the right and a carnival barker standing atop the pile. Not surprising at all their primaries are getting big numbers. The Dems have been a 2-person race basically all along. And one of them is old hat to everyone. Sanders has some novelty and excitement, but he's really just the guy trying to keep the Dems from sliding right to fill the void left by the now ridiculously far-right GOP field. Agree, but you can't ignore recent history either, where the republicans have gotten the vote and rocked the vote. A similar trend existed during the post Bush lull (and late in the Bush period) where the momentum was with the dems. Now you have the inverse (which is a normal and in reality healthy eb and flow between conservative / liberal view points). Look at TV ratings, etc, everything is just across the board. The republicans are so pissed off and they are going to be out in full force. I don't feel as if the democrats, at this point, are in that same state and I also don't know that they have a candidate who is rallying them together with that edge. When push comes to shove, Trump has levers he can effectively pull that gets the entire conservative movement behind him. My gut is Cruz is gone after Super Tuesday and it will be the last ditch effort for Rubio to make a late push (which I think will be too late). Trump, unless he bombs in the debate, will have such a wide margin by that point (and all the momentum) and I think it will be too little too late for Rubio (although Cruz exiting might be just enough to make a late run). If Cruz stays in past super tuesday, its hopeless for anyone to get Trump, imo (barring him bombing at the debate).\ PS: Please note, this will also be a debate where Trump will likely not have to do much mud slinging because the other candidates will be attacking each other vs. the front-runner.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 12:52 PM) This is actually where I think she'd do far better than Sanders. She wouldn't get angry. Angry plays right into it. She'd just give him rope, and let the people who are deciding the election (those not pre-selected based on party) see him for what he is. THat's among the reasons I'm quite confident he loses vs Clinton, if he gets the nomination. I think the wall street costs, etc, are something that Trump would rail on Hillary to the tee and people have a general distaste for wall street, etc. He'll hit on the moderate issues. I never thought I'd say this (even a week ago) but I see more momentum and signs for him actually being president than I ever did before. Nevada gave more reason for that where Trump really grew his overall pull (as well). The old theory was everyone jumping off the falling candidates was going to gravitate to non Trump candidates, but the reality hasn't been so set and as I pointed out previously, as he continues to build momentum more of those "swing" voters or potential non-trump voters will either not vote in the primary (because they realize Trump has already won) or turn their vote to Trump. And those non-primary voting conservatives who, as pissed off as they are with Trump, are not going to sit back and vote for Hillary or Bernie. They republicans are livid with the democrats and the turnouts in the primary are evidence for how irate and motivated the actual base is (and this more than anything should be what really gets the DNC worried), the vote and turnout will ultimately be their for the republican and as people go out, Trump is going to do what he can to bring back in those anti-trump conservatives by throwing him a more experienced VP candidate (imo). Lets just hypothetically say it is Kasich or even Rubio, do you really think those people are going to vote independent or democrat vs. voting for a Trump / Rubio or Kasich ticket? Would Rubio or Kasich turn down the VP bid, I don't think so.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 10:11 AM) True on first sentence, mostly at least. The idea that "it's over" though is uninformed based on history and math. Not even Super Tuesday yet. Far, far from over. First sentence ignores reality about why people vote for a certain candidate. The reason people have historically high numbers of "anyone but this candidate" against Trump isn't policy points, since as you said he's relatively moderate on the whole compared to the rest of the GOP field. It's that he's a crass, racist asshole. Moderates will see that the same way anyone does who isn't a deep-cut conservative that will vote GOP no matter what. I'd still be against Trump winning the nomination, though it is becoming more and more possible. But I'd bet the farm he'll get trounced by Hillary if he goes to the general. Hard-right will show up for him because, as you state, they always do. Moderates on the whole certainly will not. Technically, if you based it on history, no person who has won 3 of the first four primaries has not won the nomination, so if you want to go by history, it is over. Also, I just don't know whether Trump is truly racist. He makes a ton of claims, points, but than he goes out and wins the Hispanic vote in Nevada and I don't think, given the size of his company, etc, he has been anti diversity from a business perspective. While he has made some statements on the middle east and the border, the reality is, his actual record would point to him being an equal opportunity employer, etc, and a huge proponent of women rights (despite making lots of absurd comments, his actions from a hiring standpoint would point to him being proactive in giving them promotions, etc). The more I've dug into Trump and the more he is picking up momentum, the more I've realized he is far more moderate than anyone gives him credit for. The ahole part is totally on-point, but now he is starting to even get educated people behind him. He pretty much utterly dominated in Nevada (all categories). Another big factor is thus far, republican turn out has been very strong (which would bode well for a national election, regardless of who the candidate ultimately ends up being).