ptatc

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 1, 2017 -> 09:38 AM) With respect to the Estate Tax, the first $5.49M per individual is not subject to tax. So for estate tax purposes, it is only the wealthy who are taxed. Caveat to that is that inherited (non-Roth) IRAs are subject to tax since they were not taxed in the first place regardless of the dollar amount. Income that wasn't previously taxed, should be taxed.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 1, 2017 -> 07:47 AM) Yes, it's to avoid being "double taxed", you don't pay the corporate income tax on top of individual taxes, you only pay an individual tax. I'll have to double check the exact details on this bill, there are so many different versions being pushed around. Obviously, plenty of wealthy people exploit this with entities that would be hardly considered real corporations. If anybody truly cared about tax reform, they would just blow up the entire tax code booklet and make it about 10 pages long. There is no reason for it to be so complicated and it only benefits people who have the knowledge or resources to take advantage of it. The EU uses a large value added tax to purchases. This makes sense to me. Tax people on how much yhey use. They wouldn't need the massive tax code.

QUOTE (GenericUserName @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 02:25 PM) Everyone who says Ohtani can't do it are just threatened by something they don't know how to comprehend. Ohtani is such a rare case because players at his talent level would never be allowed to play both because they would be drafted out of high school (where many do play both) and then forced to only do one thing by the organization. As we see more high end talent ending up going to college, we are seeing more players who are allowed to play both and are thriving. Who is to say that Hunter Greene, if he had gone to college, couldn't have been a top pick either way like McKay was? Now I don't think everyone can do this and Ohtani may well fail in one of the aspects, but to dismiss it out of hand is shortsighted. I think you are underestimating how difficult it is to do either of them we'll in the MLB, let alone both.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 06:12 PM) After this passes it will be not taxed at all. As of right now it is an extremely weak income tax levied only on the highest of earners. I didn't realize only the wealthy were taxed.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 06:04 PM) It's unearned income for the heirs, and aristocracies are bad. I agree with it being income and taxed. I disagree that having money is bad.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 06:07 PM) When Democrats last controlled government, this was not how things were passed. Getting things passed when you have a majority on a party line vote but on thoughtfully crafted legislation would be miles better than what we're seeing. Many would disagree. This was the Obama care path.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 06:02 PM) An heir is basically earning untaxed income from who they are born from without it. I see no reason why that should not be taxable income. right but it's taxed much differently than income, isn't it?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 05:20 PM) The tax increase triggers didn't survive Byrd, so now they're trying to rewrite the bill substantially on the floor to either automatically increase corporate taxes over time or come up with an AMT for C corps and high earning individuals to raise a few hundred billion. Maybe it would be better to carefully write and consider legislation that affects every individual and company in the country before bringing it to a vote? This doesn't seem to be the way government works anymore. It's get things passed while you have the majority. On both sides.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 11:19 AM) Mnuchin said the repeal of the Estate tax will mostly help rich people t. Like this was even a question? Overall, it's really not that much of the tax pool anyway, and I personally will benefit greatly from its repeal, but why? Isn't that at least a small token you could throw out there as "we aren't catering to the rich"? This is a discussion I had the other day and I want to hear the boards opinion. From a purely philosophical point of view, why should estates be taxed. Is there a good reason other than to limit the money that an heir gets?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 03:11 PM) Coaches can only deal with the roster they have dealt. At no point have I ever said, man, we should be multiple wins better then we are. Maybe we should have won that Green Bay game, but that is about the only game where I really think we should have won and didn't with Fox. We have won some that we had no business winning though. And when you have as little offensive talent as this team has (at key positions), you are going to have some games that you just flat lose because guys are not ready for primetime. Now if we get pants by the Browns...that is another story. Fox was given zero opportunity to win in this role. None. Anyone who claims otherwise is full of s***, imo. Sorry, if you though this was directed at you. It was really just a post to the concept in general, moreso for the media really. They really seem to believe he has no idea how to coach.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 02:59 PM) He's either going to awesome or horrible. I just remember how happy so many were when the Bears brought in Fox. Now I watch TV and look on the internet, and the Bears were hoodwinked hiring him. Where were these people 3 years ago? The fact is, Bellicheck could coach this current roster and they aren't winning more than they are losing. I think either Pace needs to go, or needs some help. This is always where my mind goes. Remember the quotes about a good solid coach. He will turn the franchise around because he did it with the other teams. I don't think there were any detractors. some said they would have preferred an offensive coach but that was the only complaint. he had his issues. Remember that 5 year stint in cleveland? Yuck.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2017 -> 11:26 AM) I still think it could also mean "Abreu is not going to be here in 2020". If he's not going to be here in 2020, because he won't sign or because you know something else about his medicals, then I think you must move him now. His value is not likely to go up any farther - you can make a case (I think a wrong one) that Garcia's value is going to go up, but Abreu is coming off a great year and still has 2 years of control left. He's not going to raise his value even with a great first half. We cannot allow ourselves to be an 85+ win team led by the youngsters in 2019 and then lose our veteran 1b/DH. That is the worst case scenario, and we should do what is necessary to avoid it. I disagree that he should be traded just because he won't be with the Sox in 2020. There needs to be a veteran presence for the young players during the maturation proceeds to success. If they are offered an overwhelming group of prospects it's a different story.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 08:42 PM) You can't admit this board is EXTREMELY happy with anything the front office does? This is a pro front office message board. Because we didn't execute it right. Sox have had miserable guys in Buddy Bell on the organizational level and Robin Ventura as manager. They've arguably made some of the most bonehead acquisitions ever in trying to bring in guys to win. The ONLY way to win is not trade everybody and rebuild. Some teams with cash have done just fine in adding guys to buy a pennant. I personally think our front office gets a free pass on almost everything on here. This is true. I've never heard a bad word about KW on this board ever. NASCAR!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 06:27 PM) They're not going to hit on every acquisition, but people are making a convincing case that the guy was already underperforming in the minors when we got him, so they did make a strong bet that "we know more about this guy than other teams". I'm not sure I'd say they overpaid, because his ranking was good, but his performance wasn't supporting where he was ranked at the time. We shall see. This is true but there is more to ranking than pure performance, the "tools." This is where Hahn, KW and the scouts need to have done their work. Underperforming doesn't mean he won't perform later.Like you said, that's why they get paid the big bucks.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 12:43 PM) If you guys want a great laugh, go look at the comments on MLBTR about this. Here: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/11/red-...comment-1134647 Wow, and I think I'm an idiot. I think a move to Iceland may be in order.

QUOTE (Brian @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 10:22 AM) Any names? Well if it's employers it must be Disney or ABC, right?

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 11:48 AM) There are so many different cultures in a baseball locker room that being a clubhouse leader now a days to me is impossible. At a minimum the guy needs to be bilingual. In the current climate of baseball it's more about how they act in the locker room and away from the stadium, not so much on the field. It's more act as I do not instruction about the game.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 11:28 AM) I think you guys are hinting at an important point here so I'm going to say it explicitly - the Red Sox clubhouse was supposedly a mess last year. Price was apparently the closest thing they had to a clubhouse leader last year and he became that by attacking the media. The Red Sox's young guys like Betts weren't able to step into those roles. So, "Guy who can be a strong clubhouse influence alongside a fairly young team" actually fits the Red Sox's needs quite well. Put him in alongside Alex Cora and you've built a different team right from the start. If this is true, I can see why Boston would really like Abreu. It's also why he is worth a great deal to the White Sox. Boston will need to overwhelm Hahn to get it done.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 10:53 AM) I'm obviously pro-rebuild and also believe that the Sox still need more talent in the system to really do this right, but I don't like this fit. Obviously there's a price for any player, but I don't see anything left in the Red Sox system that would make sense. I've said it before, but I think Abreu is worth more to the White Sox than he is on the open market. Agreed. There is something to be said for having a veteran, talented, mature player in the clubhouse when they bring up a bunch of kids.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 08:49 AM) Right, but all that stuff is baked in. If a guy is a "dumb" baserunner and gets himself thrown out at bad times, he's going to get docked. If he's slow but "smart" and finds opportune times to get extra bases anyway, he's going to get credit. If he's slow but "smart" and simply doesn't ever advance, he's not going to get credit because he doesn't advance -- but he won't get hit as hard as he would if he created an out. It doesn't matter what combination of athleticism or instincts leads to the result -- a guy either creates value on the basepaths or subtracts value on the basepaths. All of that will show up in UBR/wSB, each event conveniently compared at precisely the level that they typically produce or subtract runs. How much worse is it to get thrown out than to simply NOT advance? That is EXACTLY the type of situation where linear weights shines the most. Kendry Morales is probably the slowest dude in the whole league. He probably knows that he should practically never advance more than one base in any situation. So he clogs up the bases, turning RBI hits into non-RBI hits. If a team wants to acquire him, and baserunning comes up, should they give him positive marks? Should he be considered a plus on the basepaths? Of course not. His "smarts" very well help him, but at the end of the day, he kills you on the bases. The claim that "Avi has bad baserunning instincts" and the claim that "Avi produced positive value on the bases last year" can both be true, but the former is merely an aspect of the latter. This was the whole point. You can't just use this stat and say he was a good base runner. This stat doesn't necessarily measure that. It's not a good thing to have bad base running instincts but produce a positive value on the bases. There is something wrong with the way the stat is calculated if people are going to use it to say they were a good base runner or the person is using the stat incorrectly. The other issue with the stat is that you cannot say that AVI was a better base runner this year compared to last year with this stat. The stat uses the performance of the rest of the league in the calculation. How do you know the rest of the league didn't do worse this year and AVI stayed the same? That would show an improvement in Avi's measurement for this year. They would need to compile the data from both years to truly get his measure. As I said before, I'm not trying to say that stat is useless you just need it in context like all stats. It has value. However, saying that AVI is better because this stat says so and the eye test means nothing is a poor way to look at it. It's a good place to start but you shouldn't discount other information just because this stat say so.

QUOTE (GermanSock @ Nov 29, 2017 -> 05:04 AM) why did he Play there at all? He had a Long season with full season minor league ball and the AFL. winter ball is for Players who missed a large chunk of the offseason, he would have been better off resting 2-3 weeks and then starting Lifting and other Fitness Training for the off season. don't want to wear down that Body, especially because he already had some injury Problems in the past. Probably to get close to the number of ABs that he'll see in full time at the MLB level. They think he is real close to the MLB and want to prepare him as much as possible for the MLB season. This is the real challenge for many players making the jump. The grind of the 162 game (plus playoffs hopefully soon) schedule.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 28, 2017 -> 11:16 PM) No, of course every runner isn't average, but I'm not sure why that would be relevant. This stat is using average as a baseline for comparison, and a runner that consistently advances more than average is rewarded and of course the opposite is true. Why would we want it any other way? Granted: There are going to be outlier situations, such as when a ball takes an incredibly fortunate/unfortunate carom off the wall right to/away from a fielder. But the idea is that those things get ironed out over large samples. I think maybe your issue is to assume the stat measures true talent at every snapshot, which no one will claim. In fact, it's pretty standard to consider two and three years samples of baserunning data to be able to project future performance. What the stat DOES do is flat out say that this IS what happened on the field, in terms of expected run value, compared to the average player. It's a counting stat like so many others. It's no different than looking at homeruns, really -- a guy either did or didn't hit a certain number of homeruns. Whether you want to consider a single season of a homerun total as a measure of his true talent is up to many other factors. I don't think anyone is really willing to point to Avi's UBR and say that it means he's a good baserunner now. But he DID put up an improved number this year, and so it is a relevant data point. More like a "FWIW" thing. It's relevant because that is the information they are using to determine the run expectancy. They are using the average of how all players in the league are performing to determine a single number. They are using that number to determine if a base runner is doing what he supposed to be doing to maximize his chance of scoring. It really doesn't make any sense to determine if someone is a good baserunner based on how other runners score. There are going to be many not just a few outliers. Certain base runners should advance and others shouldn't based on the concepts discussed. A runner should not be penalized for not taking a base when it's a smart play not to, even though many others would. You should want it a different way by watching if the runners makes a smart decision, regardless of the fact that 15 others players on the team would have made a different decision which would have been right for them. He probably put up better numbers because he looked healthier this year, subsequently was faster and scored more. the whole discussion started when someone stated that Avi wasn't a good base runner and someone else countered that the UBR says he is. Someone countered that the eye test said he wasn't and another poster stated that his eye test wasn't as good as the stat. My whole point, as it always is with these subjective stats, is that the stat is not the beginning and the end and the eye test has value because many of these stats that some lean on so heavily should not be taken as fact.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 28, 2017 -> 08:24 PM) So your argument is that it is a stat relative to other players in the League rather than how good a baserunner the player can be given his physical tools? That was just to show that it is a flawed stat but it's only not that it is relative to the other players it's that it is relative to the average of the other players. My argument is that this is a flawed stat and determining if Avi is a good base runner or not should not be determined solely by this stat. It is useful but flawed. The eye test holds value as well.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 28, 2017 -> 06:22 PM) I heard there is no way Fangio will be the Bears interim HC. Supposedly there are some higher ups, and I don't know who, who feel like Fangio doesn't like them. They are counting the days until he is gone. He isn't a very personable kind of guy. He's real quiet and doesn't go out of his way to please people. Maybe that turns people off in interviews.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Nov 28, 2017 -> 07:48 PM) ptac is way too smart to be arguing this point. It's all based on base runs and linear weights and run expectancy. Gotta read some tangotiger. This is the issue with the stat. How they determine how often they expect a runner to score is inherently flawed. Not every runner is the average of the league.