Balta1701

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 12:36 PM) you are prob right, but I thought the tv deal is in limbo b/c of some contractual situation. either way, with him, and the tv deal, more people outside la would like to follow them. pretty much like a cable deal or direct tv deal. something like that. From what I understood earlier this year, the contractual situation relates not to the Dodgers and Time Warner, but between Time Warner and the other TV providers in the area who are fighting the high rates being charged for the channel that carries Dodgers games. Basically the Dodgers/Time Warner contract is done, and Time Warner stands to lose a huge amount of money on that contract because they've been unable to bully the rest of the TV Providers int he LA Area to carry the Dodgers channel.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 12:21 PM) The idea of a VMart hitter at DH is very good . However the only VMart type hitter is VMart. I checked his splits and he's killed, Twins, Royals and Indians. Just the kind of guy we need, strong LH bat that kills division foes. If I was paid by the Sox to do research that's what I'd be looking for, an American League LH who hits very well against our division to lessen the chance of failure. But then you'd check the age line, realize he's going to be 37 next year, and think "hey, that dramatically increases the chances of failure too".

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 12:28 PM) without factoring the prospects that the sox have to sacrifice to get him, I will deal with the salary aspect. a big team like Dodgers who has their own tv deal would likely benefit from union with Stanton. first Stanton will make the Dodgers a very attractive team to watch, to clamor to go and see, which will improve on the attendance and finally advertising. it a win, win situation. as much as I wouldn't mind the sox going for it, it would be too much to pay to get him here in chi. At this point, from a discussion we had earlier this year, the dodgers TV deal appears to be set and the Dodgers get that big pool of money regardless of what happens elsewhere. They may still have the money to spend on him but they won't make up for it with new TV revenues.

QUOTE (LDF @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 12:13 PM) JR always stated that if needed he can approve spending, imo it also mean spending upward over 100+. but to spend for the sake of spending is what the sox will not do. if the right mixture of players are there and the sox can go to the final piece of the big pict, they will spend the money. At least last year, the clear thing they showed was that they would be willing to spend but only significantly on long-term guys. To fill short term holes, they'd grab short term stop-gap guys or guys who were looking for bounce back years like Paulino and Downs. They went in on Abreu and Tanaka because those guys were young enough you could believe they could contribute for 5+ years. I'm not sure I see obvious candidates this year who fit that standard, and VMart definitely does not as a 36 year old. For them to go after hi, they'd have to decide to switch modes from last year's "focus on long term solutions" format.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 10:33 AM) Yea you probably will be in the minority. I like Aoki and I think he can be a good piece on a contending club (such as he is with the Royals), but I do not think he can be THE piece to make a team a contender. If he is our big splash offseason pickup, we aren't going anywhere next year either. I'm really hoping they make a play for Rasmus. He's kind of fallen out of favor with the Jays (they haven't even been starting him recently) so he will almost certainly be looking to move and with his sub par season his cost will probably drop. I think he gives good power from the left side (20-25 homers), plays good defense with a great arm and has plus speed. A starting lineup of him, Eaton and Garcia could be pretty potent. The fact that Rasmus has now "fallen out of favor" with a pair of teams is probably going to be a big hint.

QUOTE (daa84 @ Sep 5, 2014 -> 08:53 AM) their road games: Easy Wins: @Was, @StL, @KC, Should Win: @Car Will Be Favored: @Phi, @Ari, @SD Toss Up: @SF Their more difficult road games feature multiple teams who are primed to/look as if they will take a step back this year (Ari, SF, Car, arguably SD and Phi too). I dont mean to say that I think they will go undefeated, or even that they have over a 50% chance of doing so. I do however, think theres ~10-20% chance of them going undefeated, which thus makes it a real possibility So you'd put money on Seattle going undefeated if the odds were 10-1?

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 10:18 PM) Before people call me nuts, http://cornerthree.net/2014/07/29/the-batt...eir-teams-wins/ You're nuts. Gilaspie is not being moved to a corner OF slot.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 10:05 PM) They should not have traded Reed for Davidson. I can't remember if I ever said that before in any other thread. Just to say again, the thread when we got him was overwhelmingly positive. I liked it, still threw in the "strikeouts" and "well now we have to move Gillaspie" caveats, but thought it was a good move. If they are missing moves like that, where they trade for a guy and he immediately implodes, that's the kind of thing that makes you question the scouting, even after just one of them.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 09:06 PM) Easy. Davidson is only 23, good power potential, possible 3B of the future. Plus you cannot possibly expect a team to know everything about a player from outside their organization, some things need to be seen first hand and that's where ST helps. Young players are a crap shoot, we all know this. You just made a really strong case that it's insane to trade for any other team's minor league players. I liked the Davidson deal, but man, if they could possibly miss "Things that turn him into a sub .200 hitter at AAA" then there needs to be another scouting and front office overhaul.

QUOTE (daggins @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 07:17 PM) Hitting for power is what he has to do though. He had a good season and he should be in the top 20 for the Sox but he didn't do enough to move the needle substantially No it's not. That's what he needs to do if he is going to be one of the best 1b in the game. If he's going to be a solid big league contributor, being at AA and being better with the bats than pitchers are with what their doing is a real big positive. This isn't the MLB of 2003. A 1b who puts up an .800 OPS today is above average.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 04:40 PM) He was Emerys first pick ever, he still will get the chances regardless if he was picked because Lovie wanted him Isn't he still on the guaranteed money part of his rookie contract where it's stupid to cut him because he gets paid either way? I thought that lasted 3-4 years with first rounders.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 06:53 PM) Maybe I will just refer to them as the Left Wing New York paper. The New York Daily News? (checked to make sure which one). Um....

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 06:06 PM) Davidson only hit .199 and struck out 164 times in only 478 at bats. The results show that the Sox knew Davidson had a problem with pitch recognition and contact issues which explains why he was sent down and why his numbers at Charlotte suck. These are the indicators that show Davidson was not and still is not ready. Also would like to point out that the Sox wanted Davidson at Charlotte because he needed work on his defense at 3B which by the way was a horrible .943 fielding percentage for the season at Charlotte . Combine all that with Conor's lefty bat and MLB experience and its easy to see how Davidson played at Charlotte and Gillespie played for the Sox. Those are the facts! That said, I'm done. Enjoy. 1 big problem. If the White Sox knew this, why did they trade for him?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 05:34 PM) Because they don't work for the NFL? Not sure what you are saying here. You and I can criticize him, or the Redskins, all we want. Our paychecks aren't dependent on the NFL. If some announcers were, well that isn't too good either. Same for when Costas went all off about guns in his broadcast. He is paid to announce sports, not tell the world he wets his pants at the sight of a gun. The New York Daily News works for the NFL?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 03:43 PM) The NFL is all about sameness in regards to things like that. Uniforms, etc. They can insist that the teams be called by their names if they want to. They have the leverage. While you are right there are times when they shorten names or just say the city, there are specific times they do say the full names, like end of quarters and such. Say the name. That is your job. Report on the game, not give us your opinions and biases. So why is it ok for people to criticize Roger Goodell's decisions on like the Ray Rice suspension? "Not give us your opinions and biases"?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 03:25 PM) Chicago Federal Appeals Court just ruled that gay marriage bans in IN and WI are unconstitutional. The thing that actually matters at this point is having appeals courts uphold them. If every single case is ruled the same way, there's no disagreement and so the Court might just bypass. The one that got upheld yesterday is actually more important at this point.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 02:26 PM) If they are supposed to be sports REPORTING, then they need to mention the name as long as it is the Washington Redskins. Otherwise they are editorializing instead of reporting. The masses just want the news, the score, the facts. We don't give a s*** how you as a writer 'feel' about anything. And the NFL needs to tell its announcers to do their jobs are report the games. If players get fined for expressing opinions and such during games by even wearing an 'unapproved' headband, then announcers need to be fined for not using the official name of one of the teams they are broadcasting. What would happen to an NFL player on that team who decided to black out the name on his uniform?

QUOTE (TRU @ Sep 4, 2014 -> 10:43 AM) Yes, but my thinking was id hope we wouldn't have to play match ups with our DH It would be great if Davidson, Semien, and Wilkins all worked out as MLB level contributors in addition to Gillaspie because that really would set up some natural platoons along with a deep bench.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 06:44 PM) Yup, it's a "miracle" that team, with one of the worst defenses of all time, finished 8-8. That's like the Sox finishing .500 with that bullpen. It is worth thinking about whether decisions made by the FO, like keeping veteran players around, or decisions made by the coaching staff in terms of training and scheme helped contribute to the gigantic rash of injuries. One season of very banged up I can agree will happen from random chance every now and again, but if the same excuses are being given this year then you start wondering why the Bears D is always so hurt.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 01:24 PM) I want to say that ptact mentioned something about GSU considering doing this. Oregon had a President who tried to do it and was fired like 2 days before I interviewed there. Their trick was going to be setting up an endowment funded by the head of Nike that would fill in the tiny portion the state was contributing. The state got pissed and forced him out, leading to protests and I'm not sure what else. Eventually it's going to happen and once one does it, a whole lot will start trying.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 01:22 PM) Even free, Ryan Howard is a wasted roster spot. No one who was mad we kept Konerko can want Ryan Howard. YOU CANNOT HAVE YOUR CAKE I'd give him a shot as a DH if I didn't believe in Wilkins maybe with the hope that as a platoon DH he winds up being useful, but only if he's so cheap I can release him without a thought if he's putting up a .600 OPS in June.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 01:03 PM) This was done in IL by many politicians. Should we remove governmental oversight of the public schools? Frankly, there's so little money contributed to most public colleges these days by the state governments that it almost seems like we should. At some point it's going to happen that a major state school is going to kick its state government out of its management on those grounds if they can fill in the small money difference. UIUC it's down to here.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 01:15 PM) Please tell me the Ryan Howard comment is a joke. I cannot think of ANY scenerio that would make Ryan Howard playing for the Sox a good idea, none. The Phillies pay 99% of his remaining salary and trade him for ~Nelvin Fuentes.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 11:29 AM) Exactly. How much is left on Kemp's contract? Like 4 years correct but I'm not sure on the money. If someone could help me out there please. More than you'd think. 2015 30 Los Angeles Dodgers $21,000,000 2016 31 Los Angeles Dodgers $21,500,000 2017 32 Los Angeles Dodgers $21,500,000 2018 33 Los Angeles Dodgers $21,500,000 2019 34 Los Angeles Dodgers $21,500,000 5 years, $107 million remaining.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Sep 3, 2014 -> 11:24 AM) Yes. If they want to contend, and protect Abreu and you have a chance at trading for a soon to be 24 year old super star, you offer him 8-10 years worth 200-250 million. I'd do it without blinking. Abreu and Stanton hitting 3-4 would be the most dangerous middle of the order in the MLB. The question is how much of your remaining talent you are willing to give up for the right to offer him that money. Would I part with a 2nd round pick for the right to offer him that? Yes. Would I part with Tim Anderson and a large number of other talented guys? Much more difficult to do. I need some of those guys to be successful in order to afford to give contracts like the one to Stanton out.