bmags

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 09:12 PM) Eric Thames with yet another home run, he now has as many as the Red Sox do collectively. This is an incredible stretch. Someone showed that with 2 WAR already in April, he basically earned his entire contract.

Does this game look like it will get in?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 26, 2017 -> 08:24 AM) Kenny is going in person. It is now officially serious. Yep. My impression of when Kenny goes is not the "let's get final word if he's good enough" it's the "let's make sure he knows that our whole org believes in him and are serious about competitive offers and hope it gives us an advantage"

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 08:00 PM) Obama Clinton Reagan Truman Going back to FDR's aristocratic roots, the best presidents have usually come from "non-elite" backgrounds. Obviously, FDR and Kennedy don't fit. You can go all the way back to Lincoln and Trump's role model, Andrew Jackson, should you wish. There definitely is an argument to be made, especially today, that a "non-inside the Beltway" candidate best understands the American people. Look at the Bushes, and their being out of touch. Gore, a political scion. Hillary Clinton, a part of the establishment for going on 30 years. Romney, political roots as deep as it gets. Even Palin and McCain were attractive to people because of their maverick/outsider status. Dole, the establishment if ever there was one symbol of it. Obviously this was a large part of the attraction to Bernie Sanders as well, being from a small/rural state and not being an official member of either political party. If you were to add up the net worth of all the US senators, he'd definitely be in the Bottom 5-10% Why did you write any of this down?

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 04:57 PM) This is, to me, the biggest issue that the Democrats have had since '00. Barack Obama uses his wealth and celebrity to push progressive policies, but people reject his voice because he also gives speeches to bankers? It's that type of idea that siphoned votes from Gore to Nader in '00. That's what led the Sanders wing of the Democratic party to rail so hard against Clinton after she won the nomination this year. I reserve the right to come back here and say that I'm wrong if Obama stays out of the fray and sits on his wealth. But if he uses his wealth and celebrity to stay engaged and fight for progressive causes, no one should judge him taking money from speaking to bankers... This is not the biggest issue that the Democrats have made since 2000. On one hand, I actually do sincerely like that you are making this argument. I think in a vacuum it is right. You can take the handouts from orgs with a plush speaking budget and a desire to seem influential and give a stump speech. It is the "I'll take any mother f******s money if they are givin it away" of politics. I made this argument for Clinton, and I still thin it is theoretically right. But there are two things: 1) I think it is a losing argument and it is not the sacrifice Caulfield is making it out to be. It is not banning all speaking engagements, just the closed door, elite org/business ones. 2) I find these speaking engagements to specifically be unseemly. As a whole, it seems to be a "I'm paying you a lot of money to consider my viewpoints!", moreso than the speaker angle "maybe I will convince you about progressive policies". You are criticizing this line being drawn but I think you probably have a line drawn too. If Obama had gone into a law firm with the implicit benefit of having an "insider" they could rely upon for connections on the hill, that would be pretty awful. It wouldn't matter if he also continued on progressive policies. He would also probably never do this. But I also thought he would not so eagerly jump to these types of gigs. My favorite part of him since being a candidate was his very disciplined optics and campaigns that reduced distractions. And that's all this is, it's a distraction. It doesn't mean he's insincere. It doesn't mean he can't advocate for progressive future. But it is a "well why do you have to do that then?" thing. And, contrary to caulfield that this is the most inherently American thing he can do (which come to think of it, generationally rich people taking gobs of money for no reason except they are already rich MAY be the most American thing possible), I don't think this is a particularly big sacrifice. I think it's tiny. Again, it's not all speeches.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 10:22 PM) if the score holds the sox will have the 3rd best RD in the AL and tied for 6th in MLB at +13, luolz. Well.

Kalapse should include Beck on next banner.

I did not realize Beck was on roster.

Man this is wild.

Reports on his speed have been a bit all over. I wonder if it's just projecting him slower as he fills out.

Symbolism matters. The government to absurdly paid speaking gig pipeline is rich, and for many it is a symbol of elites paying for access. It would be meaningful to specifically not entertain these. That isn't to say he can't do any paid speaking gigs, but the 250-400k ones are frankly absurd. He obviously can still stay involved, but for those he is trying to reach out there will be a stigma of "you are saying this to my face but then you go yuck it up with a bunch of bankers at night, and they pay your bills". And please, this isn't a struggling kid going to the nba and earning those millions. He isn't destitute, he'll have 200k pension for life and a 60 mill book deal which he can spin into revenue generating public book tour.

It's a very deep draft and I don't see a desperate team that will trade up, especially to 3. I like Watson, I'm a sucker for the great winning and productive college qb (steve walsh era was amazing!), but it really is a knock against him that David Haugh wants him. I just know he can't be successful with that.

Let's get Robert first.

QUOTE (beautox @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 01:45 PM) link Whoa!

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 08:44 AM) That was what was apparent from watching him play. The dude will consistently hit the ball hard. It's a matter of making contact on a more regular basis. The one nagging part of me is Smoak also has really nice batted ball stats to very little end. Davidsons swing and miss could be same.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 12:44 PM) I kind of hope so. I don't know how well he will make it in the NFL, but I just want a young QB to watch and give me hope for. Forget Mike Glennon. Watching a young qb sounds nice unless they are terrible.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 12:43 PM) LOL. The guy put with up 8 years of all the s*** a President has to deal with, and now he is expected to not reap the benefits of it? There are so many ways for him to make money that don't involve this skeezy backdoor speech circuit. He has a $60 mill book deal and was a many millionaire from his previous books. He wants to stay involved and "mold the next generation of leaders" then this is a good start.

NICE GUYS FINISH LAST

I am incredibly nervous about Watson. But I really don't think trading down is an option, at least not until the 2nd round. Everyone will want to trade down in this draft, nobody is desperate for any of these players to trade up.

Couldn't endorse this more: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...ma-speaking-fee

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 10:12 AM) It was that damn Texas game! Ruined the entire season! That game was like watching RBI baseball where all of our pitchers were fatigued and just throwing lobs down the middle and getting crushed. I bet Leury could have gotten outs more successfully.

Swarzak, meanwhile is k'ing 33% of batters faced. He'll certainly regress but I think he may be looking at a pretty good year if he stays healthy.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 25, 2017 -> 09:59 AM) I dunno, I didn't think so...for the first few months of the season he had a nasty split finger or whatever the hell that s*** was...it would drop right off the table. It did look like it would work. But he only had a 17% k rate and a low .200 Babip in March/April last year. But he wasn't walking anyone, and he had only a .7 WHIP. Then May came, suddenly all of that contact started finding holes. K% dropped to 14%, still didn't walk people, but BABIP jumped to .350 and it stayed around that level rest of year (though May was particularly hilarious line of .365/.396/.711 against him)

I like Bennetti, sometimes I cringe, but I don't think people appreciate the time it takes to develop into a role like this. For one, I like how he continues to experiment with the broadcast. That discussion in the 8th inning of a blowout between Bennetti and Stone around Matt Barnes was interesting. Podcast-baseball level interesting to me. And that is the perfect time to discuss that, and you know they decided to try and fit something like that in. Sox Math, Hide and Seek, whatever. You may begin to find them corny but he is trying to find engaging things in the broadcast. I know he's going to get better. The one thing that annoys me is he raises his voice a little too often, and when I'm listening in another room hard to differentiate between regular and important plays. Anyway I also like Farmer and DJ.

Albers may be the Nats best reliever right now. He added another "finished game without a save" stat last night.