Balta1701

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 10:25 PM) You're not getting anything for Duke, you might get something of value for Putnam. We could get salary relief. Not sure whether I'm confident in Duke for the next 2 years or not. I'm more interested in moving Robertson for that reason, but I could find an excuse to do it for Duke as well.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 10:39 PM) Yes Balta this is what I was getting at. I think hands down a GM trusts Shark to take the ball and go deep in a big playoff game way more that Kaz. Gotta be worth more. We're getting a good MLB-rdy player. And I still think JS resigns here next year on a nice deal. to me, I think they're pretty close to equal. Neither has playoff experience, Kazmir's been better than Samardzija this year but Samardzija has a longer record of success, and Kaz has the benefit of being a lefty. If I 100% know they're both healthy, which one I'd pick depends on the lineup I'm facing. That righty-dominated Cubs lineup from the late 2000s I take the righty, a lineup with a key lefty I need to get out I'll take the lefty.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 11:50 AM) Doubt either would net Hoffman. Hell, I don't think a combo package of Petricka and Putnam would net Hoffman unless the Blue Jays pulled Kenny Williams. You're relying on signing Shark in the offseason and hope two of EJ, Fulmer, Montas and Danish can be ready to perform. Oohhh...Robertson + Samardzija for Hoffman I really like...

10 people shot at Louisiana Movie theater, at least 2 dead including the shooter

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 09:44 PM) I think people saying Shark nets a similar return to Kazmir are crazy. We'll get a real good player. Think about it: Only one out of Kaz & Shark you want anchoring a playoff rotation. The other one s Scott f***ing Kazmir. I'm thinking about it and I'm just confused by this.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 08:48 PM) Maybe he goes with Shark since he is his personal catcher. But Soto slowly but surelynhas been playing more. I just don't think it will be th full load unless Flowers gets hurt. Well that might make sense but not for Toronto.

Come on Samardzija, hold this at one, don't have another of those innings.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 08:31 PM) Only 3rd base was still need a SS with Mercer hurt. Kang is fine at SS for the near future. Not great defensively yet but hits better than Alexei.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 08:23 PM) Alexei and a RP for Polanco Their infield need was covered today.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 05:33 PM) Kang will play there And eventually Mercer and Harrison will come back, so they actually don't want to over-crowd those slots.

Well that would likely remove any need they'd have of Alexei.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:46 PM) My thoughts are you flip Q to the Dodgers (Puig / Seager...no idea if they do it but if I can get those two, I think I live with it..if I can give up a prospect on our side to get Barnes, then all the better), Shark to the Blue Jays (if we are really lucky we get Hoffman). We still give Avi some more time, knowing we have a DH spot now open (since we traded LaRoche and Danks for Shields...this is if the Pads really are looking at just saving payroll and if the reports are true that no one would take Shields otherwise). That isn't a bad move and you've added a few more attractive pieces. The bolded is where I think you overstep. I can see a Quintana for Puig plus smaller pieces deal where Puig looks like the centerpiece working for them. Maybe you could get them in on Quintana for Seager straight up, I think that's pretty close to a fair deal from my perspective but I think the Dodgers wouldn't do it. If you want Seager+ there's only 1 name on the White Sox that can bring that.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:37 PM) And I was suggesting trading Quintana and Shark (plus we'd be trading Danks) so we'd be trading 3/5th's of our current rotation, so I don't see how adding Shields (or Buehrle for that matter) is a bad thing (in fact, under my hypothetical I really can't see any scenario where you wouldn't want to add some pitching). You then have Fullmer / Montas / Erik Johnson who can get opportunities (plus I'd hope we got at least one high powered arm back from the Q / Shark deals with the rest of the focus on position prospects) for 2 spots (plus we still have no idea whether Rodon will be good or not). If you trade Quintana, yes, then you have to find another pitcher. In that case I'd take Shields contract on, presuming that we got back a couple big league starters for Q that are also fairly cheap. I could live with that assuming the Q return was worth it.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:27 PM) And that there's zero belief Nieto (who we invested time in grooming) and Kevan Smith and maybe Austin are unlikely to be long-term solutions at that position. Nieto has almost fallen off the map this year after receiving his fair share of compliments last season. Another scouting failure? Well, it's hard to be encouraged, that's for sure. We aren't hitting on a single lottery ticket. Nieto is not a scouting failure. We gave up nothing for him. If he had a 1% shot of being a big league catcher it was still a good move.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:25 PM) Remember, you'd then be flipping Q and Shark (so would we really be that deep in pitching). I actually recently advocated for moving Shark / Q and then signing Buehrle (you can go more short-term and he brings a certain presence to him that I think would be valued). That said, I'm a loyalist to Buehrle. His arm could fall off but I almost think he's the type that would take a 1 yr deal each year and you could make the decision each year (just as he could make his same decision as to whether he wanted to play). Honestly, yes, I think we'd still 100% be that deep in pitching. We're not low on pitching until we trade Quintana or Sale. I've said before and will say again, unless EJ implodes again, I'm 100% ok with a Sale, Q, Rodon, Johnson, Danks rotation to start next year with Danks departing after a month or two for replacement by Fulmer. Puts Fulmer on the same path as Rodon (even gets him more minor league time since he signed so much sooner), gets Johnson and Fulmer nearly full big league seasons so we're not counting on them as rookies in 2017, and even leaves us with an obvious top 6, with Montas and Danish appearing in the rearview as guys who could also come up late in 2016 or in 2017 depending on how they lok. You clear out Danks...we still have a nice slot for Fulmer next year. You get those back 3 some legit experience in the bigs in 2016 and you've got a rotation that could be really, really good and really really cheap in 2017 and still leave us with pitchers at AAA who can step in, take bullpen roles, or even serve as the main chip in a trade for a major player. I kinda get the Buehrle thing, I really do. I just want the open space for those rookies.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:08 PM) Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 13m13 minutes ago Carlos Sanchez: .276/.300/.328 with two RBIs in 60 plate appearances. #WhiteSox In his last 60? In 60 against a team?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:01 PM) I agree with this post and I also say Crasnick's tweet could be a mirade of things and it could have even been the Sox working on keeping any leverage they have (I don't really think they have a lot, in the case of Shark) but they'll do what they can to spin things. I still think we should aggressively look at moving Q and Shark. Would anyone be interested in Shields (if say the Pads would do Danks for Shields and cash (or maybe Danks and LaRoche). I don't think the White Sox should be spending money on pitching in the least. Moving Danks and LaRoche would help, but that's still the Sox spending a huge amount of money at the position where they're by far the deepest and strongest.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 03:59 PM) If the White Sox made the trade today and got what Oakland got for Kazmir for Shark, the people complaining would still be complaining. Only, instead of "they waited too long", it would have been "what was the rush" I'd be saying "Well they added a catcher at the lower levels, they must have liked him, this definitely fills a need in our system and I hope he can make the bigs in a couple years".

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 03:08 PM) I'm guessing she wouldn't have been arrested. Maybe, maybe not. But if she just fought the cigarette thing but then got out of the car and kept calm and quiet, he may have calmed down. Instead she continued to piss him off and agitate him. Like I said, there's absolutely no way you can get ordinary humans to be this passive. By the department's own admission he violated the department's procedures. No way on Earth that every human is going to react passively and submit every day of their lives.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 03:12 PM) 75% of the posts were freaking out because Samardzija wasn't the first player traded. I believe the freakout had one other major component, this tweet: Jerry Crasnick ‏@jcrasnick 55s55 seconds ago The #Astros also had Jeff Samardzija on their radar, but couldn't afford to wait for #WhiteSox to decide on a course of action.

It's interesting how they're bouncing Abreu between 2-3-4 in the order.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:57 PM) You don't have to be 100% passive, but you can always bite your tongue to prevent the situation from boiling over. In this case there's no excuse for the cop, but she resisted and then just kept talking and complaining and fighting his instructions. She's never winning that argument, so voice your displeasure and then stop. Continuing to annoy him does nothing but make the situation worse. I mean we've all been there. A cop pulls you over for some BS thing and starts berating you. You could tell him what's what and get that ticket, or you can just take the verbal abuse and get a warning. What's "right" is telling the cop off. The common sense response is to just deal with it and call the department chief to complain later. So the common sense response is something that won't do anything either.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:59 PM) I think at the very least it should improve the offers you receive. Does anyone know if Oakland is kicking in money in this trade? If not and the White Sox are willing to get in a couple million, that should improve the return right there. That's very un-white-sox, at least at the July trade deadline.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:37 PM) Adams has a much higher ceiling and Danish has a much higher floor. I think the odds of Danish being a major league pitcher are higher, but the chances of one being a star are much higher with Adams. Personally, I would pick Adams out of the two. Is that just because he's already gotten to a higher level? The impression I've gotten is that Danish also has a pretty low floor since his stuff isn't nearly that overwhelming and he instead relies on control and a deceptive motion. When he struggled a bit at AA people's instant reaction was "oh his deception is just getting figured out at higher levels".

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:34 PM) It also sounds like 3 SD starters are available too (Shields, Ross, Cashner) Not quite sure we're in competition for either of those. Shields will probably pass through waivers and maybe someone would take a gamble on his contract after the deadline if one of their pitchers got hurt. Ross and Cashner are both guys with multiple arb years remaining, so they're in the boat of "teams looking for long-term options and willing to pay to get them".