bmags

QUOTE (kevo880 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 11:24 AM) So if I get a buddies cable info that lives in Chicago then I will be able to stream games through the NBC Sports app on roku, right? Yes.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 10:39 AM) Illinois led the US in population loss. Indiana actually gained about the same amount of population as Illinois lost. Indianapolis has gained almost all of that number. Chicago has been declining in population for decades now, and reportedly has accelerated in recent years. Certainly. But look at this list (and not the map, which is only to 2013) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._...ion_growth_rate I'm not quite sure if there has been an energy boom in Idaho, but it's easy to spot the outliers to energy booms in a place like South Dakota, but the trend is clear. Not to diminish if all of those 200 k growth in indiana went to Illinois that that would have no impact, but even if Chicago fixed all of its problems, and you'd still be clawing to get where Minnesota is in terms of growth and you aren't only barely in the top half. Weather is a huge indicator right now.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 10:42 AM) It obviously leaves: Braves, Yankees, Pirates, White Sox, Reds, Brewers, Rockies, Padres, Mets, and Dodgers in the top 10. I have to check out the Reds again, I didn't realize they were doing better than a team like the Phillies.

Wow, very strange to see Cubs/Boston/Astros out of top ten (even if you know why). Interested to hear what Law has to say about Jiminez and Happ, Fangraphs has been so high on Jiminez' power that I would have thought those two would pull the ship higher.

When I said "growing consistently" that is inaccurate, meant to mean growing at high levels. Indiana is growing. Chicago is growing. Illnois outside of college towns is shrinking.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:22 AM) Kansas sucks, but so does Illinois and we're losing population because of it. Chicago has a lot of manmade problems, but a lot of those manmade problems are made worse by the fact that people have shown to enjoy living in warmer climates. Pensions become a huge problem when people that fund it move away, less so when they are moving here. The only midwest city you can point to as growing consistently is Minnesota. Indiana, a fairly well run state, should be destroying Illinois in population growth. But it faces the same problem we do, it isn't warm. If we tackle the pensions and make strides in preventing violence, Chicago should just make sure it provides lots of housing and grab the run-off.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:41 AM) Couple of thoughts This is a blow to Cubs owned station if MLB does not green-light streaming for them. Would I be able to watch the Sox anywhere if I have a cable package? Yes, utilizes the NBC Sports app, you just need to log-in to your cable provider if you already have CSN

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 06:27 AM) Djokovic upset in the 2nd round in Melbourne by a wild card qualifier from Uzbekistan. Biggest upset ever? Wow I was watching that and couldn't stay up anymore. That's insane!

QUOTE (3GamesToLove @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:32 AM) Before reading it: IF you have a cable package, surely... I mean, come on, if you KNOW someone with a cable package. I'm pumped about this, when I'm barbecuing or cooking, nice to have the ipad on with the game. Ways to set it up now, but, too much work. This is great.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:27 AM) I'm not arguing that the Marlins could have added more to that package and received Q though. Yeah I was mostly responding to turnin two's argument. I do think this is helpful to see that if we get a nice performance out of one of our starters we could see these types of trades for Holland/MiGo/etc. We've been so focused on top of the line talent returns, it's hard to even figure out what those guys could get if flipped, and the teams that would be involved would be your Angels/Mariners/Marlins that are fringey contenders.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:28 AM) That's not really what you said. You said this is insight into what a possible MiGo trade would look like - and the two arent really comparable because one has 3 additional years of control. They are comparable. The teams in the market for Straily would be the same as Miguel Gonzalez, as noted by the rumors that the Marlins were interested in Miguel last July. They don't have much to spend, they need pitching, so these are the pitchers they can shop for. That they were willing to give up more to acquire Straily is certainly due to more years of control, but if you were looking for a benchmark for how valuable Q is, you don't look at this deal, if you want to know something closer to MiGo's top value, this is helpful.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 09:21 AM) Straily has the 4 years of control though. We also didn't complete a trade for MiGo. The point is this is not any sort of benchmark for Q or top of the line pitcher. There is no way to say "oh well they gave up 3 top 15 prospects from a terrible system for a pitcher with a sudden improvement, and Q is worth...100x that. What is 100x 3 top 15 prospects from a terrible system?" "...Three. Hundred. Prospects."

They are going to move to Kansas for their incredibly low taxes that Gov. Brownback has given them. I heard that's going well greg?

QUOTE (turnin' two @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 08:55 AM) Yeah, but it is Dan Straily. I think all that it is is an insight into what a possible Miguel Gonzalez trade looked like.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 08:15 AM) I said this on social media, and maybe even in here, the moment he was announced for it. I was sure that Perry, nor Trump, knew that Energy's main thing is atomic energy and running the national labs (Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, etc.). Trump nominated Rick Perry to run that. Frightening. The only silver lining here, is Perry seems to now be the only of Trump's nominees aside from Gen Mattis to be actively trying to learn what the department does and how to run it. He's been an executive, so as long as he can get a team that knows what they are doing it could be fine. I have more confidence in that then something like the EPA, where actively undermining it seems to be goal #1. Or Education. Or whatever giveaways Mnuchin is going to give.

Jinx!

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/us/po...=0&referer= Perry thought the department of energy was the department of the interior when he accepted the job. Because of course he did.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 03:52 PM) I think it was Eric Longenhagen who said that, and he is Fangraphs main prospect guy, so coming from him that makes it even better. You are right, it was him. I was pretty pumped to read that.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 02:33 PM) I've said it before - but if Q sticks around, it sure would be nice to add a couple bats. But the cupboard is getting barren. Pedro Alvarez, Adam Lind, Justin Morneau, Mike Napoli, Luis Valbuena, Logan Morrison, Brandon Moss would all be DH options. OF options are pretty picked over at this point - Gregor Blanco, Angel Pagan, Drew Stubbs, Austin Jackson are really all that is left. I wouldn't mind Valbuena as a signing. I think he can play 3b/DH so we can have days rotating lawrie/Saladino at 2b/3b, and rotate our OF with Garcia going to DH.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 02:29 PM) That's a good question to ask for all those so worried Q won't be worth anything if the Sox don't trade him in the next 24 hours. How much ddi the ultimate package for Sale and/or Eaton deteriorate by the White Sox not trading either of them a year sooner? I am with you, Sale's, I am not guessing much if anything at all, and Eaton's certainly went up. There is a limit on what teams will give up. TOR guys with 4 years or even 3 years of cheap control are hardly ever traded. One reason is because either teams don't have the prospects, or they have to give up so many. Q is in that boat. He will be at just about max price if they wait another year as long as he performs and is healthy. So I think there is a reasonable counterfactual that Sale's return may have diminished if you factor in knowledge of continued elevated performance of Turner/Bregman/Benintendi/Swanson and a wild card like Gary Sanchez. The great timing about last year included the 2015 draft featuring teams like the Astros and Red Sox in the top ten selecting good college hitters when they both expected playoff contention the next year. We got Moncada, and that's amazing. You don't see 70 scored prospects moved much. So I'm happy as hell. For instance, Dave Cameron yesterday said if Otani came over today he'd still be rated behind Moncada. But I do think packages like Giolito/Turner or Moncada/Benintendi would have been more likely than this offseason when those players had played their way in. The Astros, of course, may have always valued Bregman this high. So I guess if you really like some of these headliners like Albies/Tucker/Meadows/etc, then you should get them while they may be attainable. But if you think this crop isn't crazy and would rather follow a fast riser in July, I guess go do that. But a lot of top ten prospects happened to be on contending teams as surplus, it was an interesting time that probably closed for a bit.

Considering the last year would expect Bulls to target Rubio.

Ugh, just thought about possibility that handlers could cut a higher deal with teams to adjust for more money and not share with player. I hope they are regulating this money influx.

It will be so interesting when the first trade for int'l space goes down. I have to believe the first time it will be a pot sweetener because teams will be so unsure of value going in.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 02:05 PM) Touche. I don't disagree. There is a difference between arguing (sparring, jousting, call it what you will) and true worrying. My post was intended for those unfortunate few who are truly "worrying." I'm not worried. I do think that the package we can get this offseason is worth pulling the trigger on. Not worried about it being late in offseason, as recent offseasons seem to be getting resolved later and later (Ian Desmond/Fowler last year)

Arguing on a message board is always healthy.