Balta1701

QUOTE (farmteam @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 10:53 AM) Is that a cohort or generational effect though? I really have no idea. Just a guess... one shared experience the elder generation has that the younger generation doesn't have? The second world war. (Including many as children).

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 09:45 AM) this is a very very good post. well reasoned, I agree with the idea of the workload and tired arms for Noesi. I am sure he loves being in that position considering how the sox got him. what a great success story. I bet he is going to train extra hard in the offseason. with Danks, I hate to say it this way, but of course he may be a little tired. how many innings pitch will he have by season end? ss2k5, very good. Danks is at 180 innings this year after pitching 160 last year counting the minors.

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 20, 2014 -> 10:06 AM) here is another interesting thought. I really don't know if this has been posted. but as a team, how many blown saves has the white sox has >>>> 20 as of today where does the white sox rank with blown saves in mlb >>>>>>> 9 as of today. http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/stat/p...nded/order/true Equally interesting, the Arizona Diamondbacks also have 20 blown saves on the season.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 11:24 PM) He was a top 100 prospect in theory. Not in reality. And if he doesn't improve a lot it won't be a good deal. Also from his quotes Hahn fully expected him to play a lot for the White Sox this season and he couldn't even get a September call up. So what should be done to prevent making that mistake again? He was a "top 100 prospect in theory". How do we avoid trading for guys like that?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 11:19 PM) They have to be better. In baseball mistakes happen. Even you are wrong from time to time. I would be willing to bet anything if Hahn knew how Davidson would perform this season he would not have made the trade . So he needs better scouts based on your logic. They need to replace some. Thanks for clarifying. They failed at a multi million dollar decision and as you said, they have to be better. Time for some new ones. Its either that or you just really like complaining and aren't willing to follow the logic of your complaints.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 11:04 PM) All I have written is the trade was bad and Davidson isn't as good as he was supposed to be. The numbers support it. You started with the heads must roll crap. But thanks for the opportunity you were so kind to provide me earlier. So to summarize, you want the opportunity to complain and nothing else. Right? Everything that went into the decision was fine, as you've said, no big mistakes that should require overhauls or firing were committed. Absolutely nothing should change. Yet: QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 09:45 AM) but with hindsight, it was awful, and White Sox scouts have to be better than this. Matt Davidson cannot play. So "White Sox scouts have to be better than this, Matt Davidson cannot play", but there can't be any consequences for the GM or scouting staff. Nothing should change. They just need to be better with no changes.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:47 PM) Considering your ego, I think you need to be reminded what you thought about Andre Rienzo. Look at him now. If you can be that far off, I think you can understand a scout not making millions making similar errors. So you can't support your own statements and need to go for a low/outside blow. You follow your own logic and it implies something needs to change. That's one helluva risk to have blow up in your face. If that happens a couple times a franchise is ruined for years. The team can't afford to miss things like that. This was a $20 million+ decision that we seem to have blown. As you said, the concept was sound, that means that the work that led into it was faulty. That is a giant, multimillion dollar mistake. How many multi million dollar mistakes can a team afford? If a scout being paid a pittance causes you to blow a $20 million decision, maybe the problem is that you're not paying the right scouts?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:43 PM) Scouts, Ventura, coaches.....someone always must be fired in your mind. So you just want to complain, right? Nothing should be changed, as you said the principle was sound, nothing needs reevaluated due to a large, significant failure.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:37 PM) The good news is if Hahn wants a closer, he can probably get a decent one because he still has Davidson.What GM wouldn't want a potential 30 HR guy with 6 years of control (but apparently they do get really expensive after 3 years) for the low low price of an established closer. So you're now agreeing with me that someone committed a fireable offense by poor scouting since that isn't true and you're obviously being sarcastic in this statement. Thanks for your support. As you said, the principle was sound, but the team failed to scout the player appropriately and that's the kind of thing that should have consequences.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:37 PM) Of you owned the White Sox, you would be paying so many people for not working. Why? Scouts don't have long term contracts. The only people who do are players and managers and I wouldn't have extended a manager after a debacle like 2013.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 09:57 PM) Same here. If Hahn wanted to shop Reed, he could have gotten a lot more, IMO. I would love to know how the trade evolved. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 10:11 PM) Until I see some sort of proof, I don't believe it. Yeah, the return here was worth a lot more than the last time we traded a closer and this seemed like a solid price for a closer. They scouted the player poorly and someone should have gotten fired for that poor level of scouting because the team is supposed to scout players better than random people who compile lists for BA, but that was a fair return based on the general feelings.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 09:25 PM) But Ventura is growing! Great, then let's see it on the field next season. Please?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 07:22 PM) It is fireable when it becomes a pattern or when the talent level of the team doesn't improve even with expanded resources. I criticize the players all the time. I don't know where you get that I don't. Like the 2013 White Sox with a $120 million+ opening day payroll?

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 07:43 PM) Are you posting on a phone that auto corrected if to after? um, no. That's a prediction. I won't be mad if I'm proven wrong, but that's my guess. This team will continue to be undisciplined, uncaring, they'll spend money at some point and the first fact won't change. They'll buffoon themselves into an 82 win season after Hahn blows $40 million a year in the offseason and someone will have to take the blame.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 08:12 PM) In other news...Marcus semien somehow has 13 errors already. Cue balta rant about moving him all over the field instead of sticking with one position. Bah, he might be most useful moved all around the field. He's a kid learning several positions. Welcome to rebuilding. How about we hire a coach?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 06:34 PM) Pearce peralta and Juan lagares top 15 in all of mlb war guys? C'mon. Peralta wasn't anywhere close to a good defensive ss five years ago! All we need to do is trade for Alex Gordon and Donaldson/beltre and we'd practically be guaranteed to win the World Series. And Matt kemp is only 0.4? Seriously WTF just happened? I literally can't read this. It's a string of names.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 06:20 PM) Like the article said, he's going to be Sox manager a long, long time. Time to upgrade the talent. I think he'll fall on his sword after the expensive 2015 or 2016 teams (depending on when Hahn opens the checkbook) fail to perform.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 06:45 PM) The Nick Swisher trades were bad. The reasoning solid the trades turrible. But when I gave you the opportunity to say how close to a "fireable offense" this became for the GM, you defended the GMs for making bad trades saying that if every GM were fired for a bad trade it would be an extremely high turnover job. Who are you criticizing? You won't criticize the managers or guys in the organization for poor play on the field, you won't criticize the GM for putting crappy talent on the field 2 years in a row and making trades that you want to harp about their terrible-ness. So what should happen as a consequence if Davidson blows up but the reasoning is solid? If we do the same thing 3 more times and they all blow up is that fireable? Based on this statement, no.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:22 PM) Attaboy SS except for the weird script thing that is my problem as well

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:23 PM) Using your own logic and previously mentioned thoughts by many throughout this thread, couldn't you also assume that the national average is actually much, much higher since the majority of DV incidents are never reported? They're working with the data they have there. If you're going to question one part of it and think it may be higher, you have to do the same thing across the board. An entirely fair point.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:08 PM) How hard is it to embed the tweet you are referring to? Come on guys, board harder. Actually I've had an annoying amount of trouble with this and I can't figure out why. The embed code never seems to properly display when I copy it and post here. Anyone else run into that?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 03:59 PM) For the 3rd time, feel free to be outraged. If you're the media, cover the story, don't take it to the next step of trying to create some narrative that doesn't exist about that issue. So one serious question for you since you're certain that the NFL doesn't have a domestic violence problem...are you 100% convinced that incidents of domestic violence would get reported at the same rate for NFL players as they do for everyone else? Between money and the fact that NFL teams (and college, for that matter) are generally thought to be able to get people out of some problems, I wonder whether I can trust the stats that 538 processed there. Just for an example, something tells me that if I flipped a car off a highway, totaled it, and then left the scene before the police arrived, I'd have some serious problems.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 03:52 PM) Sure, but how much money is Goddell earning them? How much is he potentially costing them right now? For the NFL? They're probably happy for the extra coverage. It's a bigger story. They've kept the NFL on the front pages the entire offseason. The Daily Show has covered the NFL twice this week.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 03:51 PM) I think that's been covered/talked about, no? 1. Is the commissioner still employed? 2. Did a team not try to reinstate a player who beat his child up until sponsors told them not to? 3. Did that happen so long ago that there is nothing left to discuss about it?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 03:46 PM) 3-4 recent events = a string of events out of a league that employees thousands and thousands of people? This is what i'm talking about. We're creating narratives that don't exist based on a few events involving a couple of popular, well-known players. http://www.ibtimes.com/nfl-domestic-violen...re-rest-1690695 And the official efforts at the highest levels of a team and at the highest level of the NFL to sweep it under the rug/cover it up?