bmags

Is he capped at $10 million regardless of when he's cleared? (i.e. is the cap in effect immediately)

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 1, 2017 -> 10:41 AM) Jimmy has played 2 NFL games and was a Day 2 prospect out of an FCS school. I'd be stunned if they get the 1st round pick they are seeking. I believe that 4 QB's go in the first round as well. I'd rather take one of them then trade a boatload of picks for Jimmy and pay him. Day 2 sounds a lot less bad than it used to. They took him pretty high, he has shown competence, I don't think it's crazy to expect a 1st (especially after the Bradford trade)

In my view the Bears have two ideal scenarios for the draft: - Browns acquire jimmy G, 49ers love for this ILB from Alabama is real, and Bears get either their top QB choice or get to barter with teams for moving down for a haul - Browns take top QB, 49ers (again) take the ILB, and Bears get Garrett But it all relies on the 49ers for my dreams. Yay?

I feel like an idiot for not recognizing this. And kudos to Paddy and Hahn if this works out or even if it is the plan as it sounds like it's worth risk.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 1, 2017 -> 01:37 PM) Badler said the Sox are the team that comes up the most in discussions about where he might land. He says Sox haven't really been linked to any of the big names for 17-18 period and would have more bonus pool $$ available than everyone else. He also said that if he's cleared prior to June 15, the Sox may just sign Robert anyway and blow through their 2016-2017 pool since it wouldn't affect their 17/18 plans. Very interesting. That is very interesting, I had not even thought about that. If you are going to basically be forced to have him be your entire 2017 class anyway, why would it matter if you sign him prior and lose that class? Honestly maybe it's even better, we could then still sign a bunch of 300k guys in 2017 and not be capped like we would be otherwise.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 1, 2017 -> 12:23 PM) I think if you have extra money, you put it in a 529 and segregate it. If you don't and have worriers that you might need the money at some time in the future, then it might be better to put it in a more general fund so that you can leverage it in the future (vs. paying the penalties). Not saying you should leverage it, but unknown items can come up and you would hate to pay fees in those cases. The other obvious protection is, if your kids get scholarships (or don't go to college), etc, having it in a 529 might not be as helpful / useful as you expected (and then you have to pay penalties to recapture or save it in those accounts for grand kids). So you go with Utah, and another went with Utah too. Looks like the lowest fees. How do you balance lowest fees vs. in state tax deduction?

The thing about the speech is he provided no guidance on his preference for health care, so the debate goes on. The immigration stuff could be interesting, but then why was the gang of 8 bill untenable? The gang of 8 bill had the compromise of more border security + fencing, points based immigration and path to citizenship. That got killed from the right. I guess it's good now? What we do know from the speech is he views violence as a political exploitation tool exclusively, and doesn't care to fix it. Which is honestly probably better than him trying to fix it.

Actually Pat Burrell had >10 WAR his in his cost-controlled years, I bet he holds up pretty well. Erstad had 20 WAR in his cost-controlled years. So I think the main problem was their long unproductive tail, but overall for the drafting team that's pretty good.

They were productive big leaguers for a number of years, so there's that. Beer will probably give you the most certainty of a big league career, at the very least. But, I remember the same thing said about Smoak. He did give you big league innings!

This 529 stuff makes me so anxious. Literally every day I read one article saying its a great idea then the next its "instead put it in a more general fund that you can use for cross purposes".

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 1, 2017 -> 05:40 AM) Kopech September 18 at earliest I would say and that's probably being too generous. There's no way. Even if his talent proves undeniable he has so far to go to build up his stamina and innings.

I would say august, stretch them out for a few starts before shutting them down in september to bullpen duty or less.

It's really hard to win the "doctors deserve to be paid less" argument, though.

I still think Twins are likely to improve by at least 10 games. Also, I don't think Chris Beck will be pitching that much for our team (hopefully). It's still really early in spring though. We just need to hope none of the pitchers get injured.

Apparently on a call today he was asked to respond and said that "it goes both ways". And nobody knew what that meant.

Of rebuild players who we will get sick of quick, my pick is Bourjos.

Ultimately this is low stakes. I just dont' see Alvarez as worth the time. He makes us better this year, but to what end, and he blocks two players time that have slightly more asset potential. Those two players he is blocking are also not very good. So this is pointless, mostly.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 28, 2017 -> 10:23 AM) You never know if he is hitting. At least he has shown he can hit. What do you think the White Sox could get for Davidson? At this point? Nothing, which is also what Alvarez is getting. If he shows he can make enough contact to be a regular? He plays 3b, would certainly be able to play 1b, and so I would imagine an interesting young arm at the very least.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 28, 2017 -> 10:19 AM) Alvarez put up an OPS .034 higher in the AL last year than Davidson put up his 4th year in AAA that gave anyone any optimism about his future. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, Alvarez is the better bet to have any success, and he's having a hard time finding a job. But Alvarez having success doesn't really matter to this team. If you are talking about building assets for the future, I can't see many scenarios that Alvarez finds a market in July, teams just don't have spots for players that are this one dimensional. He won't net you anything, unless he somehow becomes a different player with us.

To me the likelihood that Pedro Alvarez performs to the level that a team wants to acquire him via trade and that player is good enough to make the majors is lower than the possibility that Davidson/Avi suddenly become average MLB starters and worth keeping. And I think both of them are very unlikely to become that.

We'll see. That system is so opaque.

Oh, good, thought he was at like 88

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 27, 2017 -> 02:36 PM) Hopefully Giolito gets that velocity up What is this?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 27, 2017 -> 12:26 PM) No,it's not relevant at all. He is gonna get paid his money, if you aren't willing to pay him what he wants, you trade him and move on, last year in this current offseason. There is no "costs too much to sign him". You don't let him walk for nothing. Teams like the Bears do this bulls*** and it bites them in the ass, teams like the Patriots don't do this. Well, maybe we'll finally get a comp pick and they think that would have beat what they'd have gotten on market. I still think this is dumb as hell.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2017 -> 11:14 AM) This is one of those moments where Sox fans have to remember who they root for. I know a lot of people seemed to think these things would change when we went into rebuild mode, but I just can't see it happening, this is just one of those signs. I will say this year is odd because of the last minute changes in the CBA, but the Sox are never going to be that team. I kinda figured that after last yera, when at Soxfest the sox acted like they would go big but then seemed to act like their 5 signings and staying under the cap was some industry pushing move. It's just disappointing. Their draft strategy seemed to change. They shook up their development team. This seems like such low-hanging fruit, but I can totally see it just being JR gruffly saying "16 year olds are too risky"