bmags

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 03:45 PM) To be clear, comp picks can only be traded in season. So this pick from the Cards CANNOT be traded until after the first pitch of the season. Also International money can only be traded during that period of time. The only thing we can acquire now is for the period of time BEFORE July 2, 2017, and that class is pretty much gone. The only use that MIGHT have is if there is someone from a place like Cuba that we like (say like Ralph) and that money made the difference. If we are talking about a trade before opening day neither a comp pick, nor 2017-18 international signing money can be in a deal. I could have sworn seattle just traded bonus pool amounts.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 3, 2017 -> 02:36 PM) I don't think it is a matter of "close" or not, but more about who blinks first. Both teams probably know the others demands well by now. It is all a matter of who is going to step down from that price to meet the other. With things like comp picks or international bonuses possible, it could be a more creative and strange negotiation.

This all looked pretty great except for Birmingham's lineup.

QUOTE (ecupittfan @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 08:38 PM) Thank you for this. I work in Kinston, NC and we just got our Single A Carolina League team back after many years of no baseball after the Indians Single A left. The Down East Wood Ducks are the Rangers Single A affiliate. Winston Salem will be our opening series and I will be there with my 10 year old son with our White Sox gear. We can start planning for our autographs now. Plan to make every series that the Sox are playing in and can give some reports back to the board. 'Nice, I'm going to catch Down East Wood Ducks v. W-S in W-S in may.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 03:08 PM) I don't imagine things would have gone well if one of Obama's nominees had founded a "Communism Rules" club in college, no matter how obvious a joke it was. Ha, yes true. Wasn't a nominee taken down because they quoted Mao once?

I must be thinking of wrong guy, the one that trolls everyone and is a huge orioles fan.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:35 PM) Social media makes it a whole different ballgame IMO. But yeah, we'll see. My opinion is that this is just what happens when there is an actual threat in power, the left and conservative left suddenly find themselves always arguing together because the focus is on an opposition pushing policy that is certainly opposed to the whole group. In this case, add to that an absolute maniac as president. But remove that, have a president in power that has policies that largely agree with one swath, and not with the other, and suddenly the fighting is about who gets to have the power base. Remove that president, they both realize that either option is better than an insane person. And this is just 10 days in. Imagine when we are on the verge of war over a tweet. We are relying on the sensibilities of the Iranians and North Koreans to not escalate when being provoked. Not a great situation.

Isn't La Confora a pretty big hack?

Reddy 2006 was only 10 years ago, some of the more conservative dems ever won in 2006/2008. The "both parties are the saammmmee, MAAAN" far left crowd suddenly seems to be a lot more realistic when it's actually a republican in office. Remember Nader's vote tank in 04? I am pretty confidnt that while we will see a bunch of primaries, it is not going to be kamikaze missions.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:13 PM) Well, and that was basically my point. If the far left is mad about the way the Democrats have acted over the last 2 weeks, as Reddy stated, then they have two options - get involved with the Democrats to try to pull them left, or continue to make the road easier for Trump and the Republicans (third party, staying home). I'm not sure the second paragraph is right, however. We saw 2 Republicans defections on Devos. And there's a chance that somebody else will follow suit. Even if the Dems just succeed in knocking out Devos, they have accomplished something. Well, I think they were right in that withholding support on all didn't matter. It didn't matter if they voted in the rest while trying to "single out" the egregiously underqualified candidates to put pressure on republicans to vote against. That happened anyway. It really isn't the left alone that is mobilized, not the left we are used to marching. There were straight up middle aged parents driving to Ohare on a saturday to be heard. This isn't a NATO protest crowd. It's not a minority pulling things around in the party. It's the whole shebang.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/07/opinion/...hopes.html?_r=1 brett were you really proud when Tom Cotton obstructed Cassandra Butts from getting her nominated position of ambassador to the Carribean to honor her as she battled leukemia, and Cotton put a hold on the nomination once he learned that Butts was friends with Obama and it would inflict personal pain on him? Butts died and was never appointed. Or did they not go far enough there?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:08 PM) Even if it was an accident, I think it has provided an interesting mechanism to try and stop the majority. Ultimately this type of stuff is personal opinion. I think that there is some benefit to a govt that has a high threshold to institute change. While sometimes it is frustrating because change may not happen as quickly as we want, but that also slows change we may dislike. At the end of the day the country is better off when it doesnt drastically change course in short periods of time. Instability is bad for everyone, which is why status quo is sometimes okay, even if its not exactly what I want. I agree with this. I want dems to obstruct everything they can during trump, but long term realistically the party that wins electoins should get a chance to implement policy. This whole "party wins on CHANGE" but then can't institute much, then gets voted out so that a group can actually do something, only they can't, is getting old. but that's in normal world. We are in Trump world now, so anything that makes him ineffective is good, because when he is effective we end up with mass chaos in airports and grandmothers dying away from their families.

I think the tea party tactics handwringing is overrated. This groundswell isn't to pull party left in policy (though it will) as much as pull it from accommodation politics. The dems wanted to focus on a few appointees to try to spotlight them and use that focus to pull repub support. The base rightly realized that's stupid and won't work and instead was forcing the party to not have their name on any of the bad candidates, to fight against the crazy policies and fight a president they find to be dangerous. If the dems actually tried to prevent a debt limit raising and destroy the country to make Trump look bad I'd be furious. But to play nice and act like this is any other president is wrong. Republican defections need to happen and it won't happen any sooner if you give them bipartisan cover for their initiatives.

While its hard not to laugh about the absurdity of the American president dressing down the Australian PM, one of our best allies, in basically an introductory call, it is really scary and reenforces that we will have to be incredibly lucky to avoid unneccessary military action due to Trumps temper/ego. Remember when we heard he offered Kasich the VP and that he would have great power to run the country? I was hoping like hell that would be the case, that he would just be some weird chearleader and he let competent people run things. But if he gave up reigns it's going to Gen. Flynn.

QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 09:26 AM) I dont know unfortunately. I think it was Washington. I remember looking at my twitter feed and seeing their symbol but I was desperately trying to look and see who it was for but I had to finish something before I could. This is making me anxious just reading about it. What a nightmare.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 09:19 AM) From the NYT front page. Not sure how Trump (or Obama) are to blame for this. At some point some general had to tell either or both of them, "this is the plan, it's going to work." It wouldn't look good on anyone its just strange to see leaks like that come out. The article lays out that Obama admin did not sign off on raid while it waited for better ground intel, its unknown whether Trump was presented with improvements.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 09:10 AM) The legal justification way that Al-Awlaki himself was killed is pretty questionable as well. It's a blackeye it was never legislated or defined. At this point the policy is entire family is fair game, which is exactly what we accused Russia of and pressured them to stop doing in Chechnya.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 08:54 PM) I'm pretty sure if he turned around and shot Paul Ryan in the face during the SOTU he'd be impeached. The line is somewhere between "saying extremely stupid and probably dangerous things" and "murdering the speaker of the house on live television," but definitely a lot closer to the latter. What if he shot him in the foot?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 08:05 PM) What was Hostetler asked about Beer? Basically what do you think about drafting him, there's only so much hostetler can say but first jokingly asked who Beer was. The mentioned the 14 yo thing, that they were excited about draft and that they'd do what ever they can so if Beer is on board they'd have thoroughly scouted.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 06:27 PM) Hostetler specifically mentioned Beer at SoxFest and said they've had scouting reports on him since he was 14. I wouldn't downplay their interest in him. To clarify, he was specifically asked about Beer, he didn't bring him up out of blue.

Doesn't Nightengale get tired of being our false rumormonger? At some point we gotta give that guy the goods. Its been a while I feel like. Weren't we feeding him the garbage robin justifications in sept too?

Holding out for packages from the dodgers results in not trading with the dodgers. Dodgers at this point seem like a team that doesn't ever feel like their trading partners are the ones in the drivers seat.

*Spits out same arguments that people did 60 years ago, 100 years ago, 150 years ago* "But NOW it's different!"

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 09:13 AM) Replacing Scalia with a 49 year old Scalia rather than a 49 year old RBG still really sucks, though. I don't want dems to roll over on either, but I'm not going to freak out until the actual court dynamic shifts.

QUOTE (New Era on South Side @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 06:57 PM) So, I didn't realize that quite a few of the Supreme Court Justices were rather old and that Kennedy and Bader Ginsburg were that old. I had heard an opinion that Democrats shouldn't disrupt the confirmation of the new Supreme Court Justice - but it doesn't seem like there's much they can do. It's too bad Obama didn't get to confirm his and the potential picks Trump may have over the course of his term or terms may shift the balance of the court for decades to come. Hopefully they don't overturn too many established social issues. Yes, frankly it's not replacing Scalia that worries me it's replacing RBG.