Balta1701

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 05:30 PM) he is going to be a GREAT pitcher. This part.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 05:31 PM) Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 4m4 minutes ago Robin Ventura: "Where I’m at and the people I work with, if they didn’t have faith in me I’d already be gone." #WhiteSox Yes this does help us improve our draft pick.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 05:25 PM) Taking the if we got rid of those few bad John Danks nights apprroach? Basically...skeptical that he can keep it up.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 05:17 PM) kill joy.... you prob enjoy telling little kids there is no santa. He only delivered those presents for years thanks to steroids too....

QUOTE (staxx @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 04:21 PM) Hope to see Johnson continue his performances today so we can get rid of Danks. Johnson more likely to get Shark's spot, IMO.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 04:54 PM) I agree his arm is fringey at SS but I'm wondering is his routes and quick release will compensate enough. And, if he continues to mature into his body his arm should get a little stronger. I really just want to see if they can use Sanchez as the bridge in '16 at SS to Anderson. Just to stress again...Sanchez in '16 at short and Anderson in '17 at short both translate to "2016 and 2017 are rebuilding years". I'm ok with that, but just needs to be kept in mind.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 04:59 PM) and Melky in the last 2 weeks is hitting 320+. Adam L - 310+ last 7 days Avi - forget it. Conor - 250 last 7 days Sanchez - 250 last 7 days. well at least this is a little improvement. Worth noting that this is entirely dominated by 1 game and he's had a whole bunch of 0-hit games surrounding it.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 03:45 PM) And you can be bankrupt in the blink of an eye if you have a medical problem. We've changed this for a whole lot of people. That decision came down yesterday.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 03:35 PM) Have there been any reports on what the hell is exactly wrong with Alexei? He looks like he's gone off his meds or something. Just playing badly and that has snowballed and messed him up mentally? Since he's this terrible at the plate I'm just guessing he finally is slow enough that he can't catch up with pitches or with balls he used to in the field, is overcompensating, frustrated, and then gets distracted.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 03:25 PM) Except where the government applies it for us... Please tell me where in this case that has happened.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:34 PM) Single people adopt children now, and wills handle death-related matters. I see. And there are no government regulations of wills. .

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:30 PM) Ok, so it's cool to honor someone who was an actual slave owning white supremacist that raped his "wife" slave because he also did good things? Just trying to find the line here. What about this guy? http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake...0625-story.html Historian or evil white supremacist supporter? Even the greatest people in history are flawed in many ways. They're people. Accepting that does not diminish the good they did.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:17 PM) It's silly now because those things are already in existence. I'm not actually advocating eliminating the existence in marriage at the Federal level because it's pretty much impossible now, but it really never should have been a Federal thing to begin with. The tax stuff is easy to fix in other ways, and don't get me started on the massive abuses of the immigration and immunity protections for spouses that occur. So your perspective is that we should not allow spouses into this country in immigration cases. I think that's a good example of why I describe the perspective of "government shouldn't be involved in marriage" as silly. There is no way that even in an imaginary hypothetical you can make that idea work. The government has an interest in adoption rites and the responsibilities of children, the government would be the one deciding any contract-related disputes, the government needs to have people to handle death related matters, and on and on. These are standard government functions and that leaves government with a substantial interest in checking the approval box and having things filed with them far beyond any private contract. Even in some case of a crazy "marriage is just a private contract" case, the government would have to regulate what is in that contract so that clauses like "how to dissolve the contract" "responsibilities of dealing with children" are actually dealt with in the contract and not left out. So even in that sense, the government would force its way in because you can't have a contract signed that doesn't meet those standards.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:22 PM) Not really, because if you argue against it you're called a supporter of racist white supremacists. It is my judgment that literally anyone who flies that flag is accurately described by that phrase. Even the "southern pride" explanation is BS because its deliberately excluding the part of the south that would never fly that flag...who have their own southern heritage that is being excluded. I can similarly look upon Thomas Jefferson and simultaneously believe that he was an important President, that he wrote some of the most powerful words ever penned by a human "All men are created equal", and then recognize that he did not himself live up to those words. If it is the judgment of a future time that his failings become more important to remember than his work...that is one I would disagree with but doing so is a moral, human, emotional decision and those sorts of things can change over time.

QUOTE (Special K @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:07 PM) And also, what would be the point of holding on to him (again, assuming the unlikelihood scenario that we could find something of value to trade for him)? The Sox are not going anywhere this year, and his skills are only declining with age. He seems like a great clubhouse guy, and was very good for the Sox for several years, but we should definitely trade him if we could ever get something for him. Sure feels to me to be more a part of the problem than anything else...get the "sloppy and unfocused" feeling from him a lot.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 02:04 PM) I'm sure the phone is ringing off the hook... They'll be lucky to trade him at all, the gravy would be getting anything of value in return. We should be happy if we save $1-2 million in a waiver wire trade in August.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 01:56 PM) Yes but you'll have a hard time getting a shortstop who can match his defense, even in a down year. Also, one of the best candidates to improve that in the 2nd half may be himself. His defensive numbers are in the bottom 1/3 of the league, comparable to Jhonny Peralta and Jimmy Rollins. Replacing his defense and in fact upgrading his defense might not be all that hard, we could probably do that from our system right now. Those guys wouldn't hit, but neither is he.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) Because I don't believe in whitewashing our past sins. It's better to leave them and use them as an example of what not to do. When you start erasing history then you just end up forgetting it. edit: not to mention, again, where do you draw the line? When are the means not justified? If you're going to be legit about it, let's rid ourselves of the vast majority of monuments in Washington. Let's get rid of Mount Rushmore. I'm sure you could find a basis for getting rid of just about every monument out there if you really wanted to argue that its offensive to someone. You know the amazing thing? We're human beings, we're allowed to apply judgment to these things. That's of course why the slippery slope argument is silly, but it would still be nice if we could slippery slope our way to generally more equitable treatment of african americans and others generally.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 12:59 PM) Ends always justify the means, no matter the collateral damage, amiright? 'Merica. Why else would "Google and Amazon are no longer selling confederate flag merchandise this is a slippery slope to something awful!" be used as an argument? The ends are bad therefore the means, getting rid of a racist symbol over a state house, must also be bad, based on your logic right?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 01:00 PM) Trading Alexei right now is probably a bad idea. First, he's at a low value-wise. Second, who's going to play? Saladino? Sanchez? Beckham? Some combination of them? I'd expect similar offensive results, maybe worse, small chance of better, and none of them will be the fielder Alexei is even in a down year. Better to let him perhaps snap out of it, build his value back up, and move him in the offseason when other plans can be put into play. Only exception is, if there is another trade or same trade where a decent replacement SS can come in. Even then, probably not a good value proposition at this time. Alexei Ramirez is unmovable by the Chicago White Sox in terms of trades this offseason because based on this season there is ~0% chance that his expensive $10 million option will be picked up. Based on this season, even if he finished it well Alexei Ramirez would have his option year bought out for $1 million and will become a free agent. He will get a much smaller deal than that as a free agent next year from someone. Basically if the White Sox want to get anything for Alexei Ramirez, even a small bit of salary savings, they must move him now.

With the way he looked in yesterday's game and a righty on the mound tonight...I would 100% give Jose Abreu the day off. He'll probably come out and get 5 hits based on me saying this, but I'd do the "tell him last night to sleep in today and you're not even going to pinch hit unless it goes 10 innings or someone gets hurt" routine and completely give him the day off.

I have absolutely no problem with LaRoche on this team as is...it was a mistake to sign him for a premium price rather than trying to find a more bargain-basement solution to the DH spot but what's done is done. But if we could get a tolerable player back for him while removing that salary commitment for next year, it should be done. He's a better fit on a competitive team and we are not one.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 10:08 AM) White Sox have a better record than Boston, and are just .5 games behind Oakland. Why are their chances higher? Still 90 games to go and they're 6 back in the wild card. Eaton and Cabrera are showing signs of light. Anything can happen. Most likely strength of remaining schedule.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 12:02 PM) Right now, I think the best thing for the Sox is to give AR a few days off, then see if that helps clear his mind and hopefully you get him playing like he used to. Its really unfortunate cause we would have gotten something pretty nice for him a year ago or even at the deadline, now less likely we get a whole lot for him. Come on AR, hit, hit hit. That also means, if you plan on contending next year and you can't get a lot of value for him (and you don't have anyone you plan on giving those at bats too, you might not be better off moving him and might actually be better off taking his option...presuming front office has confidence in him rebounding). You could also just move him, take what you want, and use it to give both Sanchez and Micah plenty of at bats (see if Sanchez can play SS and how he can hit over course of a full season and get Johnson major league coaching at 2B and also time to continue to develop his bat). If you do that, by the end of the year, we should have a much better idea regarding Sanchez / Johnson's future. Unfortunately, doing that would have left the white sox such a gaping hole at an important position that making that move would be tantamount to calling 2015 a rebuilding year. In that case it would have made no sense to do things like sign players who received qualifying options. Oops.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 26, 2015 -> 10:44 AM) I've been saying this for a long time. There should be no government recognition of marriage. People can enter into whatever legal contracts they want that provide any or all of the arrangements that come automatically with a marriage. The idea that the government should not interact in the least with the existence of marriage is just silly. From tax purposes to hell, immigration, it's kinda important. Should the government not recognize that if one member of a family receives a lawful immigration status the spouse should be able to accompany them? Should the government not grant immunity against testifying against a spouse? Come on.