bmags

Reagan was president when our biggest existential threat went kaput (i mean technically on the way to kaput). In terms of consequential, it doesn't get much bigger than that since Truman.

To add to Q's point, if adding Jason Hammel was the reason the Cubs got Addison Russell, you add an extra piece.

Let shipps dream, guys!

I missed it but Turkey has said they have no sent the extradition request to US for Gulen.

As someone mentioned, a bit bummed to see the top ten just with our recent draft. Reminds me of the dark days 5-6 years ago where every draft pick was our new #1 prospect, and last years fell into the teens with disappointing productoin. If someone like Engel starts raking in AAA though, it will be worth it. But really need some pitching to start coming through.

Guys, stop with the Carly Rae criticism. her album debuted at 16 worldwide. She's the best.

Yeah after Kevin white last year I wouldn't be surprised if McPhee retires suddenly in August Floyd - it is what it is at this point. Have to hope he can ball at that weight.

2014 we traded Jesse Crain

I feel better.

Winston Salem has really seemed to hit better recently and can't put that all on Collins.

There is no waving of the wand for any candidate, there's a lot of hard work which is what makes her attractive. Though I know you probably read that last bit "makes her attractive" and were like "WHAT! But she's ugly and old! Chelsea looks presidential with her looks! I don't get it!"

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 04:30 PM) Lol f*** them then. You're not getting Sale or Quintana for a bunch of low level A players who are a few years away. I'm not keen on DD trades for the opposing teams. He wins usually. I'd be ok if they were giving Moncada, Benny, Devers, etc. I just think DD is active and he makes the right reads. He was able to take advantage of 11-14 when ML talent was being undervalued. But, he eventually was cash strapped and had a barren system. I don't think that Price trade was that unfair, it was similar to others where only 1 year is left.

Difficult task for Ranaudo, as the cubs take a lot of pitches. He really needs command tonight.

LOL sure that's a competitive package then for Sale.

Actually looking at those trades, it's another reason why I think Sox should trade now. For years prospects became overvalued, and you can see why. There was a crop of Correas/Betts/Bogaerts/Lindors etc that teams were harvesting and knew would be their next core. ML talent just wasn't valued as highly, with exception of a few nice deals. Sox are at fortunate point where a lot of the teams that had hoarded talent now have a good crop already in major leagues and have excesses to trade, which is why we are seeing top 25 prospects go for rentals.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 02:56 PM) Trying to think of any trades involving pitchers similar to Sale over the past 20 years or so....David Price? Rays got Austin Jackson for him. Johnny Cueto...that deal looks terrible for the Reds. Johan Santana for Carlos Gomez? Going way back, Pedro for Pavano? Random thoughts I have in my brain. Rays got Drew Smyly, Wily Adames and Nick Franklin, Mariners got Jackson. Tremendous Dom trade actually.

QUOTE (SleepyWhiteSox @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:02 PM) I tend to wear what I like and not really care about what other people are wearing... Sleepy must have like 6 of these hats.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:07 PM) I'm pretty sure you can't trade guys on the 60-day DL Can you do a PTBNL?

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:03 PM) I want the same thing as you guys do, but I really don't think the Red Sox are giving up both Moncada and Benintendi on top of several other top 100 prospects. Everyone agrees it's too much. "WELL THEN THEY DON'T GET SALE. SIMPLE AS THAT." Exactly. There are many other options on the market. They aren't as good as Sale, but if the cost is too high, they'll settle for less. And that's fine -- I want to keep Sale personally -- but my point is this: we aren't getting Moncada and Benintendi, so don't let your heart move that direction. I kind of agree. That's why if both were offered I'd be thrilled. I do think some lower level pieces should be included as well thou

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:40 PM) They'll be able to spend on international prospects next year though so they can sign which ever top ones come over and just load up on a bunch. EDIT NVM YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT BOSOX

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:54 PM) On this we agree. However, this board on politics is just as entertaining as the campaign. How many posts are there promoting a candidate or a position vs. tearing the other candidate down? There are a lot of policy discussions on this forum, feel free to look them up. Policy doesn't always make the news every day, and we can discuss them as we like.

He followed it up with a tweet asking the same thing.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 12:46 PM) I disagree there. Using the executive to financial hurt/trample political enemies is an affront to our entire system of government. Sure, but to the point that it is hidden shows some acknowledgment in our democracy that it is wrong. You have a candidate who, I really don't know if he thinks it is wrong to ask a foreign hacker group to hack his political opponent. What do you think he does with that power as President?

QUOTE (Tex @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 12:44 PM) Because the US would never try to influence a foreign election. What is fascinating to me is how well this plays for Trump. Clearly people are thumbing their noses at conventional thought. Perhaps looking at Britain we see that this isn't confined to out shores. We've been doing what is right for so long and look what it has gotten us. So it's opposite time. Because we have meddled in foreign elections mean we should let Russia meddle in ours?

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 12:19 PM) Fair enough. I also dont want to make it sound like I think Trump wouldnt try this s***, Im sure he would. I just think its very one sided to just make it sound like Trump is the only candidate in this election who is capable of doing something like that. It might never be able to be completely proven but the women who made accusations getting audited right after is pretty damning imo and is fair game in this election. No, certainly those in power are all capable of it. I think my point is that Trump has shown himself to be especially vindictive, both from his pre-political life (constant frivelous lawsuits against anyone who writes something he doesn't like just to hurt them financially), to his post-convention hit pieces on Kasich/Cruz, to now this. Clinton is certainly capable of this, but the fact is the Federal criminal and regulatory wings have been used vindictively in the past, and to an astonishing degree under a president Nixon who showed signs of being vindictive prior to presidency. I don't think we disagree that Nixon was far more wide-reaching than any other. So...yes, it is terrifying that Trump, with all of these signals could get access to groups that could abuse their power.