bmags

LOL ok. What is she just going to be a shadow DNC chair, where nobody reports that she has left but is secretly just on CNN? CNN says she is staying on for convention unpaid. See explicit paragraph. I'm sure deadline has it in the bag thou "DNC Vice Chair Donna Brazile will serve as interim chair through the election, it was announced Sunday. She had been a CNN political commentator, but CNN and Brazile have mutually agreed to suspend their contract, effective immediately, although she will remain on air during the convention week in an unpaid capacity, CNN said. CNN will revisit the contract once Brazile concludes her role."

Yeah, no. So Marcia Fudge is the Convention Chair, and Brazile is the interim DNC Chair. An easy place to find news like this, would be a place like CNN, where you talked about her "returning". http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails/

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jul 24, 2016 -> 06:48 PM) So the DNC called their hispanic outreach the "Taco Bowl Engagement." You going to post the corrective errr

I'm guessing you aren't providing a link because you are so sure this is reported? This must be coming from the Pravda

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jul 24, 2016 -> 07:52 PM) DWS replacement was also just removed due to more stuff coming to light with Wikileaks. We're on DNC chair number 3 today. So this hasn't happened...did you mistake CNN for the DNC?

I get really frustrated when it's time for us to sell. When it was Peavy, that he was 1.5 control we thought it would be such an asset to get more back. Then what did we hear back? "teams were looking for a cheaper option" When it was Rios "Just a rental, shouldn't expect much back" I feel like when push comes to shove we'll hear "Too good for the market, teams went after cheaper options"

seriously. WTH.

so the clubhouse staff is doing the job requested of them by the marketing department that work long hours with not great pay to provide a marketable product to their fans and chris sale needed to bully them to show who wears the $2000 suit? good work Chris, always about winning.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Jul 24, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) Hello, fellow Sox faithful. Wild that after that blazing hot 23-10 start, we'd be dealing with an all-but-dead team late July, and, worse yet, a new round of grave concerns about this team's future. At some point, even this loyal to a fault ownership group must acknowledge that the franchise is broken. Because they're intelligent and successful (at least in their other pursuits), I'm clinging to the hope that there will come a time when reality trumps misplaced loyalty -- if for no other reason than protecting the value of the franchise. Me? I'd jettison Ventura, Cooper, and KW today, and give the keys to the car to RH (without his egotistical backseat driver). Now, on to the topic of "specific trade ideas." I'm not going to list the various Top-100 guys we should target who are sprinkled throughout prospect lists, but concentrated in the systems of a few teams. Others have done that at length. Instead, my contribution today is simply my own view (shared by others -- very little is original here) of big-picture philosophy. More than a few of us have criticized Sox management of either lacking a coherent overall philosophy and/or failing to properly execute on a philosophy (if they actually have one). For your consideration: First time in ages the Sox are in the driver's seat for all sorts of possible deals. If we're going to sell, then MAXIMIZE this rare opportunity. In an era of sky high prices for a limited pool of Top-20 pitchers, we have a Top-5 guy and a Top 12-15 guy (I'm a huge Q fan), BOTH with way below market price tags and control. Are you kidding? That's gold. Please Rick, treat it as gold. Create an auction environment. Make sure all of baseball understands we're expecting to be blown away because we don't have to trade either of these guys (and not to you ... Red Sox or Dodgers or Rangers or Astros). And Rick, please -- for once, we're not going to be the ones throwing in additional sweeteners to make the deal. THEY pay or we don't play. Recognize WHO would pay the steepest price for a Sale or a Q and make them pay! For instance, we all talk about how the wealthy teams can take on Sale or Q without blinking. That's true, but it essentially trades just the star player, and not the star player PLUS his insanely below market contract. A team like the Pirates want and frankly NEED a Sale (+ contract) or Q (+ contract) to survive. Accordingly, there is every reason to suspect that in the end they'll pay the most (and they do have a system which will allow for that). Notice I haven't mentioned the Schlubs. Count me in among those who would only deal with the Cubs if they were literally the last team in all of baseball. And they're not. There are at least 5-6 teams who could provide the same or better return than the Cubs. Do you want Sale or Q pitching for THEM and helping them to achieve something that would sicken many of us? I sure don't, nor do we need to do so since there are so many other alternatives. We also have a solid and fairly priced closer at a market price. Great value in Robertson to the rich kids on the block. You know the Red Sox would pay to have him as a temporary closer and then a top-tier 8th inning guy (and wouldn't be phased by the price tag). Others might too. Want him? Then pay good value -- not fair value, GOOD value! Above that threshold, best offer takes home the prize. Frazier? Big value there to for a team that needs a bopper in this power-starved era. 1-2/5 seasons of power and decent defense has value. Melky? Professional hitter having a really good year. With control for another year at a reasonable contract. Someone will want him and should pay. I think the philosophy is to construct separate deals for the big-5 (with just a remote possibility of packaging Robertson in a blockbuster of blockbusters starter plus Robertson deal). Trade all 5 and the Sox should net an overall haul that might include a half-dozen Top-50 prospects, another half-dozen 51-100 guys, and likely a young stud or two just removed from that status (Betts, JBJ, Mazara -- no way the Bosox trade Bogaerts). Smoke clears and the Sox have a couple of young stud regulars we could be excited about (position players please, since we're curiously horrible in developing our own), plus 10-12 new super prospects who would likely ALL be in our top-15. Key is to be professional and closed mouth about what we're doing. Plug the leaks. Negotiate all these deals separately and simultaneously. Announce a flurry of closed deals at the same time before the rest of the teams see what you've done en masse! This CAN be done and it should be done (even if we've never managed to execute on this before). Use a sweetener -- I'm talking about guys like Duke and Jennings (for heaven's sake, no throw-ins like Fulmer or Adams, but feel free to throw-in a Coats or a Sanchez) -- ONLY to close a super-deal. For once, we should resist having to sweeten. Let the bidders do it! Intentionally flogging this horse one last time ... for ONCE we're holding some valuable cards -- an Ace (!) in Sale, a King in Quintana, and various other cards of value. It's go-time, Rick. Don't blow it. Act like your job is on the line. It is (and should be)! good stuff cy, especially formatting

LOL

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Jul 24, 2016 -> 08:50 AM) #teamsale #imwithhim The dude cares more about winning then some marketing event. And quite frankly he's one of the only guy's on this team that's performed day- in/out during the multi-year s*** storm. Reminds me of that scene in Vegas vacation. "I'm tired of this s***. I want something better!!!" He should revolt against all star game , signing autographs with kids, and national anthem too. What do they have to do with winning? The toddler mind can't handle them.

I don't think sale gets traded. Look on Twitter like Bill Simmons, people have no clue how to price him at that contract

I am dumbfounded that sale has any support here.

Wow. Thought Sale would be the one staying. Dude may win a cy young on another team.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 23, 2016 -> 05:12 PM) Thing is...they can probably get Archer and not have to give up two IFers Rays asking for more than Gallo for Archer

Yeah I'd say flu sounds convenient. Trade may not be imminent but may be holding him back

Brian just said he has the flu supposedly

Sounds like it's the Rangers that need to cool theirs

QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Jul 22, 2016 -> 05:20 PM) Driving up the price for Boston??? Good point.

I mean the hardest part about valuing sale is his contract. It's just unprecedented.

I just don't know how Texas fits that well.

I don't know enough about Rangers but damn if they have enough players to get hamels AND sale in back to back years can we add Jon Daniels to the trade?

Ah.

Is Clinton really friday media dumping her VP?

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jul 22, 2016 -> 03:51 PM) The sidearmer that was on Cleveland and is now on the Angels. OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH he's on another teammmmmmm What a weird way to write that out