Balta1701

QUOTE (Dunt @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 09:51 PM) I really don't see him staying next season. In terms of 4th OFers/late inning defensive replacements, I'd rather have Danks in there. Especially if we don't sign a full time DH for big money, it's going to be plausible to carry a couple OF's and a couple IFs next year if they want to go that way. I can't say I'd be stunned if they did that given the number of guys we seem to have who could take IF positions.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 05:43 PM) He's considered an immensely talented prospect and always has been. The key will be whether or not he can adjust and catch up to the heat or if he's always going to be a .200 hitter (if that). Soler and Bryant are much, much safer bets long term. I'm surprised that the fastball is such a big issue for him as quick as his bat is.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 01:13 PM) Does Danish, Hawkins and Sanchez get it done? Probably not. From our side, that would be a whole helluva lot to give up for a guy who missed most of the year and has only 1 career season with a >800 OPS. I'm not sure if I'd do that or not, and I'd probably have the same response if it were done. "Wow that's a big gamble they must be really sure he can be healthy next year".

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 12:56 PM) We've actually had this discussion before, and it didn't matter what I said. So pretend to trade insults, post a lot of wingnut materials, and walk away in the same place we would have been anyway. Yeah, that's totally "pretending" to trade insults. I've just been conditioned by years of dealing with other human beings to believe that it's an insult when people say/type negative things about me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 12:15 PM) I had no doubt that would have thought any different. It is what we have all been conditioned to accept through centuries of panic over corporations and wealth in general. And so here's where he realizes that the data presented do not support his position so instead of making a reasoned counter argument he throws out insults to everyone who isn't as good and enlightened as him and walks away. Because no one could possibly come up with a similarly silly insult back.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 12:10 PM) What are internal options I the OF? I think we end up with Eaton in CF and Garcia in RF and Viciedo DH/RF and Jordan Danks stays as a #4 or #5 OF'er. It will be interesting to see if we sign a big bat for DH or switch off with position players being given a break from the field. Earlier this second half I was thinking Wilkins at 1B/DH switching off with Abreu but Andy has just not shown he can hit big league pitching We have no starter-worthy options in the OF in our system other than Eaton and Garcia. We have 2 potential backup level guys in Sierra and D2. Viciedo is still under our control but just barely. There are no guys within our system who could be ready at the start of next season to contribute at a major league level without a position switch. We could decide to move Marcus Semien to a corner OF spot. There could be guys who step up next year. We should still have Mitchell and Thompson in the system, and although they've hit long periods of difficulties, it's not 100% out of the question that they could turn their careers around, but there is no way they'd make an appearance before the middle of next year at the dry earliest. If its hard to see this team holding onto Viciedo, which it is, then they need a corner OF.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 11:46 AM) Both fall under the same ideas. Less labor force participation and more government spending means more dependence on the government for income. There is no wealth building if you are depending on the government for your income. There is no wage growth that could outpace inflation. The more and more people who move that way, the less and less people there are who have the opportunity to accumulate wealth. Plus as government spending has become a larger and larger portion of GDP, extra spending has less and less of a stimulative effect on the economy, which is born out with the government spending more and more for recover after each subsequent recession and the recoveries being shallower and shallower. You are also balancing the economic recovery on a smaller and smaller portion of those who are working and paying taxes, meaning that their problems affect a larger and larger portion of the economy, meaning recessions will be deeper and longer to recover from. But just as an example, the last "expansion" was the exact opposite of what you said. Government spending as a share of GDP was lower in the 2002-2007 expansion than it was during any time since before the 1980 recession and at the same time, the growth was much more concentrated at the top than any time beforehand. The 1992-1997 expansion saw decreases in government spending compared to the previous expansion and increases in inequality. Government might play a role in this by rigging the game in favor of the rich as laws get easier to buy, but varying government spending levels from one expansion to another do not support the trend you're saying exists. The trend in increasing inequality continues regardless of whether government has expanded or contracted.

Bill Simmons gives a rant about how Roger Goodell is a liar, how it is "F***ing Bull****", Dares someone to come after him and says he's "Going public" if that happens, gets a multi week suspension from ESPN/Grantland.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 05:29 PM) Maybe, but its totally unprecedented. Not to mention recruiting and compliance is the WORST. Michigan also has an ol boys club that Harbaugh doesnt get along with at all. Recruiting today is a full time job and a head coach babysits his staff and players much more than in the NFL. Are we talking about the Harbaugh who was already coach at Stanford?

QUOTE (Jake @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 01:32 PM) Derek Jeter - 2,743 games, 119 wRC+, 73.6 fWAR Barry Larkin - 2,180 games, 118 wRC+, 67.6 fWAR Larkin's sin is that he didn't play for the Yankees, so he only got to go to the playoffs twice. Larkin's in the hall of fame though right?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:15 AM) OK, what was constructed with the house was a box on the outside of the house. The box has one coax input that can come from cable/satellite, and then that box splits the signal to the four rooms in the house that have built in cable outlets. It was what the DirecTV was originally connected to and now it is what TWC is connected to. So are you saying that the TWC will have to continue to run like it is now and that DirecTV will have to run a new line from the dish? That would be my guess, someone would have to install something separate.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:15 AM) Must you only look at the construction of this team through the frame of WAR? The WAR numbers were quoted to me!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:15 AM) There were some guarantees of All Star appearances the night of that trade for Allen. Reed is better than Pena though. White Sox prospects have been so bad, any with a pulse gave people hope in that era. And I'd say that talent-wise, even after this season, Davidson is still better than Allen.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:08 AM) Really dumb tech question: I used to have DirecTV with DSL internet, but the internet really sucked. I switched to the local cable company (which is now TWC which is being bought by Comcast) mainly because of the much better internet. Now DirecTV is making me ridiculous offers to switch back, and the TV portion of my bill would be much lower, but I'm not willing to give up TWC's internet. So, my question is, can DirecTV television and TWC cable simultaneously run through the same cable wiring in my house? I believe DirecTV would have to run their own cables through the walls...which they can do.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:02 AM) I understand opportunity cost and the win curve and all that, so what other spots are there that we would reasonably spend on? Catcher - we already have an average one and the only expensive one is going to be prohibitively expensive. Second - will be filled internally Third - internally Outfield - we can spend here DH - we can spend here (or we'll see a rotating DH situation) Bullpen - we can spend here but it would be ill-advised Upgrading the rotation would seem give us the most marginal benefit. Our starters amassed 11.9 WAR this year and 10.4 of it was from 2 spots. This is not some overcrowded rotation, even if you throw in Rodon. I think we fundamentally disagree about Noesi's potential. To me he is not somebody to be altering decisions for, so it still looks like starting pitching is the most obvious place to spend. The elephant in the rotation remains Danks. If we could have gotten rid of him with limited cost, then spending in the rotation becomes obvious. But as long as we're stuck with him, the comparison winds up being a signing in the rotation versus Noesi, not a signing in the rotation versus Carroll, if we're leaving a Rodon slot. John Danks is the problem there. Noesi right now is fine at the back of the rotation. If we could slot in a legit pitcher into Danks's spot with Danks's money, that would work, but if Danks is going to get a rotation slot because of his contract, then we're sorta stuck. As long as Danks is in that rotation and performing at this level, you'll be able to say this is a weak rotation in a WAR sense.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 11:04 AM) I never mentioned trading any of them. I just said if the trade was the other way, and Hahn got Reed for Davidson, all those saying they would still rather have Davidson would be singing a different tune. They would say he won the trade. On a board where people actually rip the manager for not using Snodgrass in a key situation, a guy who has retired 7 hitters in his career and has given up 7 runs 8 hits and 3 walks, it boggles my mind people just don't want to say it turned out that the Reed/Davidson swap didn't work outfor the White Sox. People can hold out hope, but when you hit .199 with 164 strikeouts in year 2 of AAA , you are going to be an exception if you become useful at the big league level. The White Sox once traded Brandon Allen for pitcher Tony Pena. Brandon Allen never did anything, hit .203 across 4 big league seasons. Technically we won that deal. I still didn't like it and still ugh at the thought of it today.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 10:31 AM) If we're taking it as a given that Rodon will be ready for prime time once we're past Super 2, how about he takes Noesi's spot? Everyone seems to be slotting Noesi ahead of Danks on the depth chart because their expectations are light years apart. But just put their seasons side-by-side, independent of any salary or handedness concerns, and there isn't really a compelling reason to anoint Noesi. He's not that special, you guys, and there's a good chance this is the best he'll ever be. So even if you can't move Danks, I bet there's room for Rodon. I strongly doubt Bassitt or Beck could give the production Santana would. I'm not all-in on Santana or anything, especially for much more than the 2/$25 figure I threw out there. The home run rate would still have me worried. I'd rather have him than Masterson, and I'd rather have him than James Shields, I know that for certain. The issue with all of this in my eyes is that we have to recognize we have limited resources. Bassit and Beck are very unlikely to give the same production as Santana, and Noesi might not as well (although there's clearly promise there). But there is an opportunity cost associated with any player we spend free agent money on. If we go out and sign a person like Santana, yes he's an upgrade over those guys but how much of an upgrade are we talking? If Rodon is taking Noesi's spot and we spend money on Santana, we might improve the record a little bit, but we've done so at a cost that is >$10 million per year in signing Santana. By doing that, we've made a tiny improvement, spent a load of cash, and left us still having holes to fill. Somewhere down the line we're going to have to get contributions from guys already in our organization. There is not enough free agent money available for this team to fill all its holes, and this roster doesn't have enough trade chips to bring in A-listers either. If we have guys like Noesi who seem plausibly able to give a non-terrible season as a #4-ish starter, and do so for the MLB minimum, that frees up money to be spent filing other holes. I don't want us to spend a lot of free agent money on a position where we'll only get a minor upgrade. That makes sense if you're an 87 win team trying to get to 90 wins. That makes no sense when you're a team in the low 70s.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 09:09 AM) you bit on the bait. STAAAAAHP QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 09:13 AM) Why did you do this Ok, ok, apologies.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 09:09 AM) 2. 1 World Series in the last 14 years. It's almost like the 85 Bears, Jeter's biggest accomplishments happened last century. This is still better than a whole lot of other people, and that 14 years also includes a WS loss.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 10:21 PM) It was awesome Not the most intense episode but lots of "setting up plot lines for the whole season".

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 12:40 AM) No, I would not have made the trade without a closer in waiting. As far as the day of the trade, like with the Adam Dunn trade I trusted soxtalk posters. I got excited about Davidson. Admittedly I got excited about Davidson after reading the posts. However I was not in favor of the trade cause we had no replacement as closer. I always despised Nate Jones as a possible closer. I basically shut up as I did after the Dunn trade. Fans were so excited I figured they knew best. As far as now ... I consider Davidson another Josh Fields. Hope I'm wrong. You knew in January that Nate Jones would be hurt all year?

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 08:33 AM) How about Ben Zobrist? He is 33 but still a very valuable player finishing up a $7 Mil contract. Tampa needs offense so I wonder if we could package Viciedo+ Danks + cash ( Tampa won't want the 14 Mil) for Zobrist and a young RH pitcher. Sox could stick Zobrist at 2nd or OF or even SS, he adds speed and OBP as well as some pop from the left. Tampa always has good young arms at AAA. Danks has pitched pretty well at the Trop and Viciedo gives them a younger hitter w some pop behind Longoria Isn't that a downgrade to Tampa's offense?

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 07:40 PM) for this discussion only, lets assume danks is not in the equation. Ethier signed a contract that is 6 yrs/$95.95M which ends in 2017. Van Slyke contract is very controllable thru 2020. so for this discussion, it may be a good deal for the sox. the sox have 2-3 more yrs of slyke at a good rate. 2-3 years of Van Slyke at a good rate compared to 6 years of Micah at a good rate, in addition to absorbing a lot of money on Ethier. Van Slyke may have proven more than Micah at the big league level, but he's also going to be 28 next year and he's never played more than the 234 PA's he's had this year. You could convince me that Van Slyke for Micah might be a tolerable move, but I wouldn't like it. Taking on a good amount of money in addition? No thanks.

QUOTE (Whitey @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 07:13 PM) True.... But, Van Slyke has serious potential and is exactly the type of hitter we need. He is the main reason why I would make the deal and assume the extra cash. Then don't talk to me about including Micah. If I'm taking the extra cash on its because I'm getting Van Slyke and I believe at his advanced age of 28 next season he can contribute moderately in a role similar to what the Dodgers have him in now.

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 07:24 PM) I will give way for you guys who are soooo good with the advance stats. saying that, I think the sox does need 1 sp pitchers. whether it is a reclamation project or #4-5 pitcher. the reason is I would not like to have a hole in the starting lineup for pitchers, like they did last yr. I also don't like to put all the eggs in the basket so to speak on Noesi replicating his success. I just would like another arm until Rodon can earn his spot. The White Sox clearly need a starting pitcher right now, I agree with this, but I despise the idea of signing anyone to even a 1 year deal if they think Rodon can appear in the big leagues before the end of 2015. No matter what they do they should know exactly how he gets to the big leagues next year and that can't be "relying on someone to get hurt". I'd rather go with Caroll/Rienzo out of the gates for a month, lose games, and then have Rodon take over, than sign someone to a 1 year deal and then have Rodon spend the year in the minors because of the big money guy we signed. That's why I kinda think Masterson makes sense. After this season he should be cheap enough that we won't feel bad if he's replaced in June with Rodon if pitching poorly.