Balta1701

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 06:26 PM) With so much Beckham talk it makes me think about how we approach this trade market with Anderson. Not that I am saying you should just go out trading all your developing minor league talent but that you should not over value every piece particularly when trading for a proven major league player. It turned out they should have traded Beckham while his stock was high but EVERYONE overvalued him so they didn't bite on any trades. So we should want Hahn to do the same thing with Anderson and hope he proves to be awesome one day? I am torn. I have no problem trading Anderson for exactly that reason. He fits our needs but he's 2 years away and has a decent bust potential on the way as a pretty raw hitter. He might well need a couple years in the big leagues to reach his potential if he ever does. I'm certainly open to moving him in the right deal. The problem is that moving him for a guy with 1 year of team control remaining seems to me to be a completely awful deal any way I slice it.

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 05:54 PM) The two years are what makes him more valuable. Its like, a ~3 win outfielder with lefty power and defense in a market with very few good hitters for two years vs a ~3 win pitcher in a much deeper pitching market for one year. And yet people are talking about a 3 win SS with 2 years being traded for a 3 win pitcher for 1 year.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 04:03 PM) But I think Beane would hang up the phone if that was the Sox best offer. Like I said, the only way this deal proposal makes sense for the Whtie Sox is if for some reason Billy Beane accepts a "he should have hung up the phone" offer, and even then it's still confusing.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 04:03 PM) If the Sox trade for Shark they do plan on being competitive this year, you keep skipping that fact. Not only would they add a top of the rotation starter but the low cost of Samardzija's contract this year leaves them extra money to fill other holes. I'd count that team as a $90 million team that I'd still put well below .500.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 03:55 PM) I am sorry but this post is just an insane overvaluation of Marcus Semien, who I happen to like. If we could get Semiene for a yr of Shark, I would do it every day and twice on Sunday because at the deadline, there is a high likelihood if we were out of contention I could sell him for far better talent than Marcus Semien. Plus, I fully expect the Sox to make a significant run at resigning Shark if we were to trade for him. Trading Tim Anderson with no intention of signing Shark to an extension, would be something I would have an issue with. Anderson has a chance to be a special player, Semien does not. You also can't view this in a vacuum, if you trade Semien for Shark, why do you just assume we go with Carlos Sanchez vs. looking at outside options (either via FA or trade)? PS: I think it is just as likely that Johnson starts at 2B anyway so now we are trading a utility guy for an above average major league starter. So basically trading for Samardzija makes sense if Billy Beane forgets to call 28 other teams and gives him to us for a huge discount. If you "fully expect the white sox to make a run at signing him to an extension", why on Earth would you give up anything in a trade for that guy unless you have a competitive roster this year? Again hitting my point, this makes no sense. If were going to blow 9 figures on a pitcher, just go add Shields.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 03:50 PM) When you say no version of this do you mean no version of including Anderson? What if it is Semien. Marcus Semien for 1 year of Jeff Samardzija continues to make no sense for the White Sox. It makes us slightly worse next year most likely in the lineup (Sanchez becomes your full time 2b, have to go sign a utility infielder just to back up Gillaspie), which is even worse in a way than Trading Anderson since trading for Samardzija is such an "all in on 2015" move.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 01:55 PM) 1) A special prosecutor coming in after the fact wouldn't have changed Wilson's version of what happened. 2) The GJ heard from all of the witnesses in person. It's not like the prosecutor was providing them with a summary of statements. However there was no effort to put together an actual picture of what happened from a point of view with any skepticism of the officer's statement. Furthermore, the so-called prosecution asked leading questions to make sure the officer filled in details regarding his point of view (at this point did he rush back towards you?) while casting doubt on the testimony of others who disagreed (you've previously been convicted of a felony, is that correct?). A full investigation would have, instead of just dumping witnesses on a jury indiscriminantly, actually attempted to put together a story of what happened. "Could witness 6 have seen this given their position?" "Which of them confirm the appropriate distance from the vehicle"? "These 3 are on camera afterwards so we know their rough position". I couldn't pull that off in a grand jury setting but that's what should have happened and didn't because the prosecutor had no interest in challenging the memory of the shooter. That is of course on top of clear improprieties like the officer's statement never being taken, the officer filing his own weapon as evidence, etc.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 03:25 PM) This is well-reasoned but I don't think it placates me. Just because the A's overpaid for him in the first place doesn't mean the Sox need to get involved in a rebound overpayment. I said this earlier today and stand by it. If the White Sox were an 87 win team last year, Tim Anderson for Jeff Samardzija would make perfect sense. Prospect with talent who is raw, ~top 50 in the big leagues, 2-ish years away from being a big league rookie and 3 years away from probably making a difference, decent bust potential, in exchange for pitcher who outperformed contract last year, no injury history, could easily push team to 90 wins and into the playoffs, fits in the rotation, and could be offered a QO/return of a draft pick at the end of the year if he's unable to be resigned. That's a perfect deal for a team right on the cusp of winning a division/right on the cusp of competing to make. Even an 85 win team last year, that's perfectly sensible for the White Sox and fair value for the As. The problem continues to be we're closer to a 75 win team than an 87 win team. For that reason in my eyes there continues to be literally no version of this that makes sense to me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 02:21 PM) With the prospects we have, I think this makes us a better team. But of course, just signing James Shields for comparable money while holding Alexei makes us even better than that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 01:10 PM) Yet that is exactly what riots are happening in MO over. I agree. Way too many people took the well-rehearsed, well-polished officer's statement as complete fact when it shouldn't have been viewed that way. There should have been a real investigation by an independent prosecutor to actually attempt to put together a real picture of the witness statements. Things like "Who could actually have seen what they said they saw, how does that square with the final position of the shot", "can we verify anyone else in real-time saying "he had his ****ing hands up" right after the shot". That's why a special prosecutor should have been appointed, to do that investigation. There should have been a skeptical cross-examination of the officer's statement too.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) So no remorse for the frat being accused of this with no evidence? If she can't remember, or isn't clear, then that sucks for her. But needing closure doesn't give her the right to just pick details out of a fuzzy memory and screw potentially innocent guys. You, and the media, are judging these guys on something someone SAID they did, which they may or may not have done. I actually blame the writer of the story more than I blame that woman. She has a history of embellishing her stories and stuff. She wrote of a military rape, also in Rolling Stone,. and if I recall that story as well was torn to shreds. Note the highlighted. I keep coming back to this in several threads. You are demanding that people have a standard of accuracy in memory that the human mind is simply not built to do. People cannot recall exact details of important things, let alone things that happen during exceedingly traumatic events. If someone attempted to do a full, honest investigation of the case, they'd probably find that the memory of everyone involved was equally fuzzy, because that's how memory works. Again, if you adopt that standard, you are right on the verge of making rape legal because everyone will have an inconsistent story. The only one who has no inconsistencies in their story is probably the one telling the boldest lie. Is there a solution? Well, I'm totally not sure and I have no good answer on this one. I do agree with you on one point though. The Rolling Stone seems like they have a good chance of actually having written an article about a rape victim on the UVA campus. However, once the magazine published that article, they began relying on the assumption that this particular person's memory is fully accurate, which is the same mistake you're making in demanding that standard of accuracy. They're putting their reputation on the line for the memory of this person and whatever details they were able to confirm 2 years later, and so yeah, they deserve some significant criticism for that. So yeah, in those shoes, I can say I almost certainly would not have published that article, but not because I don't believe the person, but instead because I don't believe a participant in a tragic event will be able to give accurate enough testimony to stand up to the scrutiny of the entire world.

QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 12:03 PM) At first I thought, "That's a lot of money and years for a closer that throws 91." And then I looked at the rest of his stats beyond ERA and saves. 13 k/9?? Jeesh. The Sox have had a revolving door at closer since Jenks fell off a cliff. It'd be nice to have some stability for the 9th inning. Even it it does cost 12m a year. They've had a "revolving door" because they traded 2 closers away expecting that they'd have internal replacement options.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) De Lo Santos was our #2 pitching prospect - he was a washout but he had high value; so did Sweeney, who is still in the majors.. It was a bad value trade. Williams made 3 bad value trades that one could say won the WS - the stars collided and Cotts had a career year. He sent Lee away for a salary dump + 2 middling players to give salary room to sign others; we gave a top 5 prospect in baseball plus a prospect named Michael Morse, plus our staring catcher for 1/2 year of Freddie Garcia. Yea, it worked. But that's once in a lifetime fortune. Well, there was a really good chance we'd be able to extend him when we did that deal, we got it done pretty quick IIRC.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:44 AM) From his perspective, if he thinks one of his top SS prospects is 1 year away, he could get Rameirez on a two year deal and flip him after one. He needs to trade for a MLB ready SS as he doesn't have one. This is why I think Rameirez will be in the deal if it happens. But of course, that makes no sense for the White Sox, even if we get back a "High level prospect" in return, because we're trading for a "win now" pitcher on a 1 year deal and then leaving ourselves with a gaping hole at shortstop with literally no one ready to fill it. No one can tell me that having either Semien, Sanchez, Tim Anderson, or Saladino as our #1 starting shortstop in ST next year looks like a competitive, could win the central division roster. Ditto any "SS Prospect" Beane is willing to give up - if he had one ready he wouldn't trade or Alexei. That would leave the White Sox deciding whether to spend money on Jed Lowrie, Stephen Drew, or Asdrubal Cabrera to fill that SS hole. In other words, we'd commit $10 mil next year to JS, another $5-$10 mil next year to a veteran shortstop, we'd upgrade the rotation but we'd downgrade the offense and the defense while giving up a year of team control for the key piece. That could make sense for an 87 win team again, but we're right back into "Why are we doing this" territory to me without an unreasonable, unexpected, long-term discount on the pitcher.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:38 AM) I personally wouldn't give up Anderson. I think if they absolutely must have this guy, waiting a year, or even until June or July makes more sense. I wouldn't either, and I can't fathom why Billy Beane would give up Samardzija for less than that. Giving up a top 50-ish prospect in MLB for a pitcher like Samardzija should actually make sense for several teams around baseball. Just not the White Sox.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 09:33 AM) If the Sox do trade for him, they are going to have to give up value. Whether it is one year or not, you theoretically get a frontline pitcher for a discount, and if you can't sign him, you get a supplemental pick. So for the year of service, the 9 or 10 months of exclusive negotiation rights, and the insurance of a decent draft pick, it isn't like you are going to be able to get him for someone who doesn't have a really good chance of succeeding. Which is exactly why this entire concept makes no sense unless we're getting a solid discount on his next contract. It's going to take someone solid to get him, there's a reason why Tim Anderson's name has come up. Tim Anderson would be a fair return for Samardzija and if the White Sox had won 87 games last year that would be a perfectly reasonable gamble for the team to take, that extra pitcher could put us over the top in 2015. Since the White Sox have won 75 games the last 2 years, that deal suddenly makes no sense for us because even if everything goes right, making a 15 win jump is hard. The only way that would make sense is if we could look beyond 2015 and expect the pitcher to be present at a continuing discount.

Link So there's now corroborating witnesses that are saying "something terrible happened to this girl, she withdrew into depression as a result, and now we're judging her based on whether her memory of the incident is strongly accurate." These folks could be making stuff up as well, but this should illustrate the problem. It's now out there as a standard assumption that she is making the whole thing up and falsely accusing them for whatever reason, but it sure looks like this is your standard, complicated story.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) You don't even know the parameters of a potential deal and you're already calling it terrible? Let's give Hahn the benefit of the doubt here. He isn't going to do something stupid. I can't come up with parameters of any deal that makes sense for the White Sox to my eyes unless Samardzija gives the White Sox a large hometown discount that he wouldn't give the Cubs. Otherwise, moving anyone of even minor value from the White Sox's system for Samardzija seems silly to me and a much worse option than going and spending that huge, 9 figure money on someone like Shields or Scherzer.

Oh joy, now we have to deal with another 20 pages on how this terrible idea is something the white sox should do.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 7, 2014 -> 10:10 PM) No reason at all to give Tank away. People want to trade him for nothing; and yet other want the Sox to trade for player with numbers not much better than his (and substantially worse than his 2012, 2013 seasons). I have no urge to have Viciedo on this roster and think he's overpaid by about $3.5 million. If an opposing GM gives up something of value for him I will consider that a stupid move by that GM.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 7, 2014 -> 08:30 PM) Nice strawman Tex, but nobody said anything about sweeping them under the rug or not treating them seriously. Two wrongs don't make a right, right? So why deny accused rapists of their due course. A mere accusation can ruin someone for life. Colleges throwing people out of school, their name spread around as if they did it. If the allegation was false, then the false accuser should be messed up as much as possible legally for it. If the person is guilty of the rape, then punish them as much as you can. The reason why this is such a complicated issue is spelled out right there. Put yourself in the shoes of a woman who is accusing a person or perhaps even a group of people of something improper. It's her word at best against one person, maybe even against that of several people. It's probably a traumatic experience, so memory isn't exactly going to be the best thing anyway. Basically we're talking about something on the verge of PTSD for the victim. Now you want to add a penalty of significant jail time if the accuser cannot prove her case. That would be practically the last time anyone in this country ever is prosecuted for rape, because no one would ever dare to accuse someone again even when it happened.

Anthrocon, a gathering of "Furries" in Chicago, was disrupted by a release of chlorine gas.

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 7, 2014 -> 06:21 PM) The worst Xmas song is Last Christmas by George Michael. Paul McCartney's Wonderful Christmastime is just terrible.

You just have to stay in areas with none of those dirty peoples.

Wheat has gotten a bad rap.