Balta1701

Go enjoy that Astros Parade Houston, no other sports exist. Jesus.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 03:14 PM) They might. But I think it would be for a few 2nd tier prospects..nothing elite. As for the Sox, I'd hope we'd go for a more athletic team. If I were the Marlins, I'd be looking at a guy in the 50-75 range as the centerpiece if I was going to move him, and I think there's enough interest I could at least get a top 100 guy from someone. There have to be 4-5 teams we've mentioned as interested so far. If the price doesn't involve a top 100 guy, then I think even more teams would jump in and you'd have 8-10 teams willing to roll the dice on that contract. Especially since this looks like a weak free agency year. That kind of market should push the price up.

QUOTE (cjgalloway @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 03:40 PM) No one thought Tatis was a good prospect.. No matter how much we all want to hate the trade it's a guarantee 98% of us approved of that trade when it happened.. Tatis was no one to us at the time Here's the thread. IT was split, not overwhelming in either way. A substantial number of posts were people jumping on me for hating how that team was built and who was put on it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 12:54 PM) Instead we are going to wait until free agency and spend exponentially more? There are still a ton of question marks in this system and players still need to be brought in. If the Sox really are going to stay cheap, this is doomed as a half-assed rebuild. I know everyone wants to talk about the Cubs and Astros, but you can't ignore that they also put some of that money to use. The Cubs themselves spent about half a billion dollars in free agency to put themselves over the top. The Astros have also added a couple of hundred million in future obligations on to make their championship happen. Or we can just sit by and hope that our player development has come far enough that with what we have will end up being enough to be a title winning core, as there isn't really anything of value left to trade, and players that are draft next year aren't really going to be in the core until next decade anyway. Yes the Astros added a substantial chunk by trading for McCann and signing Morton, but their opening day payroll was $124 million. They added to that with Verlander, but the total they're going to spend to win the world series this year is something like $130 million. Obviously that will go up with time if they hold onto guys, but the opening day payrolls for 2 of the last 3 world series winners has been under $130 million and the White Sox have crossed that line before. Heck, they crossed that 10 years ago and salaries have been going up >5% a year since then. No one, not even me, will say that they can do this without spending somewhere. If they get a reasonable deal they should take it. But they also cannot be scared of spending in the future - it is going to have to happen. They need to spend 2018 filling as many roles as they can from within - find the couple of hidden guys out of their 10 AAAA players who can be long term players by giving them playing time. Then, figure out next offseason what we need to add to push us into the race in 2019 and spend.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 12:37 PM) That's why I said at the beginning of this convo that it probably isn't likely. We're going to hear about this idea all offseason and it makes sense in theory, it's just hard to make actual names work out with the math.

QUOTE (Brian @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) Who is good that was drafted after Valentine that I can get pissed about missing out on? There are a handful of redrafts out there, but that draft class looks bad all around right now. Guys in that redraft who went after we picked: Malcolm Brogdon, Boston Celtics Actual selection: No. 36 overall (Bucks) Ivica Zubac, Phoenix Suns Actual selection: No. 32 overall (Lakers) Skal Labissiere, Sacramento Kings Actual selection: No. 28 overall (Kings, via Suns)

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 12:21 PM) The Sox are also going to be operating at a huge margin next year, with no international spending to speak of, and a cap of about $10 million in the draft. It isn't that crazy to think of next year, especially as the majority of the Robert money will be accounted for. What we have to keep in mind is the prices. If you're taking on a $50 million deal in order to get a guy, you are basically buying that prospect for $50 million for his 6 years, and absorbing any risk of him flopping or getting hurt, with an additional $30 million or so of costs on the top side. If we'd taken on a $50 million deal to acquire Rodon, right now we'd be less than thrilled with that deal, and if Rodon comes out next year and suddenly turns into an excellent pitcher, we'll still have to pay him an extra $40 million in arbitration over the next 3 years. In other words, if we're talking about buying a prospect like this, that $40-$50 million number floated earlier should buy you one of the top prospects in baseball. That level of money should buy a Robert-quality prospect. $20 million taken on should probably buy someone in the top 100. That's going to be tough to see the Dodgers giving up. Hell, I'm not sure the Dodgers actually have anyone worth buying for those prices.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 12:10 PM) King and Zeldin from NY are already coming out as No's on this over the SALT rollbacks along with LoBiondo from NJ. The guys from the New York suburbs also have to worry about the Mortgage deduction drop. $500k in a suburb of New York is actually going to hit a lot of their constituents. A lot of California counties also.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 11:55 AM) Everyone should be angry that they turned over so much control to Clinton's campaign team because Clinton's campaign team was extremely bad. And at DWS for allowing that to happen, and at Obama for allowing DWS to be head of the DNC.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 10:22 AM) Just for references sake, in the private sector, this is what is called money laundering and fraud. I am sure that both parties do this as standard operations, but holy crap. Apparently even though he didn't need to use it because of how his fundraising worked, 2 months after the "Hillary Clinton Victory Fund" was established, Bernie Sanders set up a "Bernie Sanders Victory Fund" that would have worked the same way, basically treating DNC fundraising as a pass-through or as you say it as money laundering.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 11:11 AM) Would the current Dodgers front office with Andrew Friendman do that kind of deal though? I think it's more likely they'd just release Gonzalez then trade prospects away with him. The trick for the Dodgers this offseason is - do they want to really make an effort to get under the luxury tax 1 year? If they do, they can launch a spending spree next offseason without having to pay the multi-year repeater penalties. Based on their previous purchases and guys like Seager hitting arbitration in 2019, it's possible that getting under the tax for 1 year could save them more than $50 million in 2019 and 2020.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 10:22 AM) Just for references sake, in the private sector, this is what is called money laundering and fraud. I am sure that both parties do this as standard operations, but holy crap. Can we count on your support for any bills to end private financing of campaigns?

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 09:56 AM) These pay-fors will not last in senate. A tax cut bill can pass the senate. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 10:02 AM) Who knows if it even makes it out of the House. They wrote the bill largely in secret again and didn't consult their caucus for the input or opinions on various provisions. R's from states with relatively high property taxes and state income taxes (IL, CA, NJ, NY) have strong reasons to object to this bill since it basically deliberately harms blue states. They'll get something passed at some point, and it'll largely be bad, but I'd be shocked if it's by Christmas and anything close to what this bill is. If I had to guess, I'd say that the state and local tax deduction cuts are at bigger risk in the House than the Senate for exactly what was written here. Those states don't have Republican Senators, but there's several dozen Republican congresspeople from the rural or white suburban parts of those states who I'd be happy to run against with that. You've literally got the state pride thing "Peter King voted to raise taxes on New York to cut taxes on Texas!". Even the Ed Gillespie level racist campaign won't compete with that.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 11:05 AM) Glad we switched from popeyes to KFC, which is appropriately worse. I used to like Popeyes a lot but sometime when I was in high school they changed their biscuit recipe and it went from being the best ones I've had to always disappointing.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 09:54 AM) If he was only signed for 3 years then sure, but the downside is just way too great to justify paying a solid prospect price. For the White Sox, yes. For a team like Boston - top of the AL East this year, solid pitching staff that could be better next year, in need of power to put them over the top, and ready to compete right now? He's not worth a Moncada with that contract, but he's worth a good amount to them.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 09:41 AM) Anyway this is DOA in senate. Fun suicide mission by Ryan though. I'm not 100% sure it is. I saw this morning a possibility of an 8 year lapse on the corporate tax cut part to make sure that it fits reconciliation rules, which would require only 51 votes. They'd lose the "Giving businesses stability" line, but that was BS anyway. This one doesn't have clear stories of "You will kill me if you vote for this" like the last one did.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 09:32 AM) That's the thing though, no way in hell lipinsky would vote for the pay-fors that directly affect his district. The "State and local tax one" is going to be tough. If I'm running as a Democrat in downstate Illinois and my opponent voted for this, I'm totally running on the fact that they voted to raise taxes on Illinois to cut taxes in Indiana.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 09:12 AM) They're trying to same tactics they did with the healthcare fiasco--secret bill, bunch of really bad compromises and changes that their ideology demands, no way to actually get to a politically acceptable and passable final bill. I still think the most likely outcome of "tax reform"/upper class tax cuts is what we got with the Bush tax cuts--a $300 check for most people, hundreds of thousands or millions for the wealthy, and it all sunsets in 10 years. And utter silence of course from the folks who have complained about the deficit and inflation coming to kill us all immediately for the last 10 years.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 09:25 AM) White dude murders 5 dozen with guns, injures hundreds more: DON'T POLITICIZE THIS!!!! Brown dude murders 8 with a rental truck: BAN MUSLIMS!!!! By the way, I saw that the Slidefire company resumed taking orders yesterday after finishing the backlog of orders they received thanks to the free marketing in Las Vegas.

QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 10:40 PM) Hey SI, how about a Sox champions in 2020 cover? How do you pick white sox or braves though?

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 11:26 PM) The upside is fine....you get a good player for 3 years at basically market rate...and then he opts out...fair enough. But the downside is too severe. If he sucks, not only did you throw away prospects for an under-performer, you're stuck with him through his 30s until he's near 40 and the team is c $250 million lighter. That price really smashes your face in for a bad trade. How do you price a player like that in trade? To me, it's basically a contract trade, so it ends up like a terrible FA signing if things go south, but no more. If you've got a team ready to compete right now, "3 years of an all star center of the order hitter at market rate" is something you would totally pay a good price for. Maybe you don't empty your entire system, but it's not unreasonable to expect to pay a solid prospect price for that.

QUOTE (cjgalloway @ Nov 2, 2017 -> 08:17 AM) I also am of the belief that Rodon shouldn't be counted on as a starter any longer. I'd actually prefer that we move him to the bullpen as a setup man or maybe even try him as a closer. I'd imagine in a closer role his fastball and slider would be devastating, The dude just can't stay healthy.. I think it's time to make a switch with him. I think there's a good chance this will happen with Rodon eventually, but I don't think it'll happen with the White Sox. They will obviously give him another chance to start next season whenever he does finish rehabbing, and if he gets hurt one more time he's going to be supplanted in the rotation right about the time his arbitration cost starts going up.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 12:52 PM) I did not make excuses for Nazi's but I am sure the Nazi's are glad they have you to speak for them. Nobody has given a s*** about Nazi's or white nationalists for a long time. The KKK and other similar groups have all had their membership waned, their influence eviscerated and their relevance vanished. What changed is when Trump got elected people like you have latched onto the idea that we have a white nationalist problem. The only places they are relevant in American is in the prisons. I have never even seen a white nationalist. The best thing to happen for American white nationalists is the media and people like you constantly blabbing on about Richard Spencer and David Duke giving them more spotlight and attention than their internal efforts could ever garner on their own. The progression of society has phased this antiquated and bigoted thinking out of the mainstream and only through cheap partisan tactics has their notoriety made its way back to our TVs and computer screens. The bolded is untrue in the age of the internet. The KKK itself has even recovered from where it was in 1990, and there are a number of groups proliferating alongside it. There was a surge of those groups in response to the 2008 election, they started to drop off after 2012, and then another surge associated with the 2016 election. It is worth wondering how the dismantling of sites like the Daily Stormer after Charlottesville will influence these numbers in the future as they've lost their easily accessed safe space.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 12:04 PM) ss2k is right...it goes on in politics, the music industry, the film industry, sports...anything where those that have made it have large quantities of wealth, power, influence. This is the dirty side of those industries that most people assume "comes with the territory," and choose not to discuss because most of the time, it is very inconvenient/damaging to do so. Academia has just been starting to confront its version of this in the past few years, but then Betsy Devos happened.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 11:54 AM) I am with you on all but this. We are still in the penalty phase for 2018, so there isn't going to be much to load up on. Are there any veterans coming from anywhere who aren't subject to the rules for youth? I don't believe Yuli Gurriel was subject to them because of age, anyone like that?