Balta1701

QUOTE (Knackattack @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 05:09 PM) Say it's an IP or appearance based return, what is to stop Tampa from just not using him intentionally to not get the number needed? The Boston Red Sox. And anyway, the White Sox were in a position to take the best offer. If the Rays included an unreasonable number of appearances or innings, the Sox could just look elsewhere.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 05:08 PM) So how do these types of trades work? Is there a PTBNL set of player names decided on between teams, and if Crain hits a performance benchmark...the Sox get to pick from the better of the two lists? That's probably exactly what it will be, and I'd guess the benchmark relates to appearances.

ARE YOU HAPPY NOW

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 05:01 PM) I can honestly see a deal like Santiago for Lawrie + low level prospect. Or Santiago for Ackley + prospects. Not these deals exactly but something along the lines of these. For some reason I just feel like the Sox are aware they can make SP and equally aware they cannot make hitters. Haven't both of those guys had their stocks fall considerably?

Ok, time to shift this to a "Crain traded" thread.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 05:00 PM) The Democrat's bread and butter: create dependents and promise them more. Are you kidding? These are elderly voters, mostly white. They're going to be the only people the Republican Party has as voters pretty rapidly. If the Democrats could get this group to start voting for us in larger margins over the next decade we'll run away with every election. The Republicans will do everything in their power to keep that group happy. The bailout of the people whose 401k's let them down will be a huge, bipartisan undertaking.

QUOTE (JoshPR @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) I think the peavy deal is imminent. With the way robin let him start the 8th the other day in front of the fans, so he could get the standing o from the home crowd, and then all this. Just saying And then slink away embarrassed that his last moment in a white sox uniform was, appropriately, giving up a HR.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:57 PM) It also doesn't mean that society has to bail those people out for being stupid either. No, the fact that you're talking about millions of voters is what means that will happen.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:37 PM) Lol. So if Peavy gets us a couple SP prospects then we should no doubt have the depth to trade a Q or Santiago for a ransom of position players. That's how the quick rebuild is done. Heck, I'd be willing to trade Quintana or Santiago for the right price regardless of what happens with Peavy...but the key is "The right price". I think the right price is higher than anyone would reasonably pay.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:45 PM) Because people find it harder these days to actually save their own money instead of banking on these stupid ideas called pensions. Its not rocket science to manage a 401k, s*** put your money in a bank account that yields a return and you dont do anything. And yet 40% of people less than 10 years from retirement, people who should be counting on these things, have >80% of their money in high-risk stocks. And that's from the already-filtered group of people who actually can get 401k's. Saying it louder that people who make mistakes are dumb doesn't make it a good program.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:35 PM) This isn't rocket science. My father who barely finished high school has managed to control his 401k, IRA and some stock purchases to give himself a comfortable retirement. he isn't computer literate and had no idea what most of these things were 20 years ago or so, but knew it was important to plan ahead and did what he could to do so. Maybe a little bit of the ant and the grasshopper here, but if you didn't plan good enough for yourself, not my problem. You may say it's not rocket science, but the actual data about 401k's say that it may as well be. 40% of the people with 401k's are making a basic, obvious, enormous mistake that will, when the next bubble popping occurs, lead to their savings being hammered right before retirement. They won't be out on the street.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:31 PM) I know no one here likes Rios, but why not just hold onto him and make him a qualifying offer when his contract is over? We definitely risk being stuck with him longer, but if he turns it down, we get a pick for him which will probably end up being more valuable then anything we will get in trades. We're probably 2.5 years away from that point given that there's a reasonable option year in his contract.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 04:00 PM) That, to me, isn't even the argument. The problem is, how do you get people over to that, when you have an already-underfunded set of obligations in a pension plan? Heck, even if you are responsibly funded, you will suddenly not be when making the transition, so you have to pay an enormous amount of money to make it work. Therein lies the biggest problem. The problem with underfunded 401k's leaving people with no retirement security is going to make the problem of underfunded pension plans look like a walk in the park.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:54 PM) Nope. We'll have them die waiting for rationed medical care on Obamacare. HAHAHAHAH AYOURE FUNNY HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA SO CREATIVE I LOVE IT HAHAHAHAHAHA IMPRESSIVE ARGUMENT HAHAHAHAHA GREAT HAHAHAHAHAHA AWESOME YOU RULE

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:49 PM) I think a lot of teams have already expanded their payrolls with knowledge of that extra $25 million coming next year. The average salary of players will probably adjust for that $25 million over a few years, but I think this offseason you won't see as many teams going on a shopping spree as you might think. It's also not like the Marlins are going to spend that money, and the Yankees will have a bu nch to spend but they're also trying to get under the luxury tax threshold.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:42 PM) There were a handful of links and an episode of Frontline in the financial thread (or at least I thought, can't find Balta's post now) a few months back that highlighted just how big of a bite management fees take out of the average 401(k). It's something like 40-50% of your total value over the lifetime between fund management fees and account management fees. Don't want to derail the thread, but here's the Frontline episode if you're curious: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bu...-fees-cost-you/ There's a reason retirement security has been thoroughly destroyed for much of this country at the same time as the pension system has been dismantled. It's a setup to extract fees. What no one pays attention to is the fact that as the pension system has been dismantled and replaced with totally inadequate 401k plans...we're not going to allow the baby boom generation to retire out on the streets. The government and the taxpayer will wind up making up the gap, just as will happen to the people who lose their pensions in Detroit.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:37 PM) I just don't see them using it. I think this years payroll was a little high and they extended themselves assuming they compete. I see them cutting quite a bit off the books. I really don't see them going into 2014 with anything close to a $100M payroll. I might be mistaken but I truly don't. Peavy & Konerko coming off the books will clear a good amount of room, but if you move Rios, Ramirez, and Dunn, now you are talking about all kinds of room. In fact, in the old days, that would have been the kind of room that could have made them major players on the international market (although I fully expect them to be this upcoming years given that they'll have a large pool thanks to being so s***ty this year). Edit: I wouldn't be surprised to see the Sox potentially buy in the next year or two. Targeting younger players who they could extend (from teams that may not want to offer some of those contracts to). I really don't see them offering any major LT deals on the FA market this off-season. Figure its more likely they'll sit around and go after some guys that sit around and sign them to one year value deals and then look to spin them off if the team isn't in contention. If it is in contention, they would be in a position to potentially add assets (+ have payroll flexibility). Let me put it this way, if I were in their chairs, I'd look at "Spend another $25 million this offseason to fill 1-2 holes and try to go into next season loaded" as the fallback position in the event that I didn't get satisfactory offers for the guys currently being shopped. That kind of money should fill the 1b hole, provide several bullpen arms, and probaby a bat that can be worked in part time in the corner OF position should Viciedo continue to be awful. That's enough to give this team a shot next year if they can find a manager who can remind them of how to call for a baseball rather than tripping over the pitcher's mound. They ought to have the money to do it, it's hard to believe they don't have the money to do that, but it may not even be the preferred route. It should be there as leverage.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:16 PM) And $16 million is about what we are going to pay him for the next five years combined. Hell, maybe even less if they sit him down this offseason and extend him.

QUOTE (GoGoSox2k2 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:32 PM) yep as is Alexei. was kind of hoping at least one of them would be out to add some speculation for us With Robin as the manager? Those guys could have already been traded and he would still have them in the lineup. He doesn't know how to make a lineup without them.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:20 PM) There would be a lot less flexibility if Dunn, Rios, and Alexei aren't traded. In fact, I'm going to imagine the club would have minimal flexibility (given I'd expect lower attendance, etc). Take a look at the actual numbers, there's $30 million or so coming off the books as it is, and another $25 million in the national TV deal. I know they won't spend all $55 million of that since the attendance has gone down, but even if people aren't moved, there's got to be $25 million or more to spend if they choose to.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:09 PM) It's not like 2014 looks that promising to begin with. You should never count out a team with a strong starting rotation and contracts coming off the books.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 03:08 PM) I said that they need to get Hawk more involved in the front office.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 29, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) I don't think I ever said he isn't valuable. He is. But I don't think he's a top 10 pitcher, I think he's hit his peak, we'd be selling high if we trade him as we other teams will also see his value, and I would prefer not to have these same clowns in the field supporting our pitchers next year. Just my opinion. I don't think he's a top 10 pitcher...but if he's in the top-20 to top-30 range already at his age, with 5 years of control waiting...that's incredible. The estimated value of 1 WAR right now is something in the range of $4-$5 million. That means Jose Quintana doing this is a $16 million+ pitcher right now.

Prince fielder is hitting 249/.332/.395 since May 1.

The Barons are around this week again. Here's another picture/video annotated writeup of last night's Barons/Smokies game. Hoping Ricky gets something nice in the lineup before the end of the week when they depart.