Balta1701

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 01:55 PM) But in all seriousness, who is their leadoff hitter right now? I assumed Heyward?

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) I will say this...with all the talk by Arrieta at the end of last season and so far in ST about how he ran out of gas, it's amazing to me that there hasn't been one comment by the Chicago media about how Maddon abused him during the regular season last year and could have cost them big time in the postseason. At time towards the end of last year, it seemed Maddon was too concerned about trying to win Arrieta the Cy Young instead of getting him ready for the postseason. They finished what, 1 game back of the Pirates for home advantage in the Wild Card and 3 games back in the division? That was a race until the last couple days. Imagine hypothetically the Cardinals hit a wall the last week and only get to 97 wins. Suddenly the Cubs have a shot at home field against the Mets. Maybe it doesn't change David Murphy turning into Mike Trout, but that coulda been a different series right there.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 01:49 PM) There has already been a report that Rollins turned down more money to come here. You seem to be applying much less skepticism to those reports this year than you do to other reports regarding the White Sox.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 22, 2016 -> 01:27 PM) I believe if all things are equal in spring training, Rollins wins the job. I would imagine in order to turn down a higher guarantee elsewhere he had to get some level of assurance from Rick that he had a real high chance at the job. I disagree with this, at least the part on the "Higher guarantee". Especially with Desmond still on the market, if Rollins were able to get a guaranteed deal from any team wanting to compete with a hole at SS, he would have done so. There may be teams that still feel they could upgrade at SS and compete, but they similarly judged Rollins not worthy of a major league contract offer. The only place Rollins would have possibly gotten a "higher guarantee" as you put it is if he went to a team that is a non-obvious contender...but even then, those teams aren't likely to spend money on a late-30s SS even if they're looking at the trade deadline. I'm guessing that's what you're imagining with a hypothetical "higher guarantee", but this is a league where Alexei only got $3 million and Rollins is older and fell off equally hard last year. I think this is probably comparable to the offers he got elsewhere...perhaps he got slightly more money as an option here, perhaps he got an earlier opt out, or possibly he may have just thought this was his best chance to make a roster.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Feb 21, 2016 -> 01:58 AM) Newbee here, how many delegates does the republican need to secure the win and how many do each have now as well as how many each upcoming state has? Is there any site with that info? Here is "how many each state has and how they're allocated" and Wikipedia has a quick easy count of allocated delegates.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 21, 2016 -> 08:54 AM) Haha no, benghazi has been a four year long partisan witch hunt. If people actually cared about "addressing Embassy security" or "why the h*ll did we start bombing Libya anyway" they'd have legitimate questions to ask for Hillary. OTOH, when the leading contenders for the opposite party believe we should be "Carpet bombing" without knowing what that is and believe we should dip the bullets we use in pig's blood to offend their religion even more...well "maybe we shouldn't bomb every country" isn't a question that's going to be asked. Similarly, "maybe if we're going to put embassy like facilities in war zones maybe the CIA shouldn't establish bases there unless they're secured" or "maybe those budget cuts to embassy security weren't the best thing" won't be asked, because that would imply Congress had a role in it. Interestingly, it's not a question Sanders is really able to focus on either. He can hit on "well your Iraq vote was wrong" but he's not interested enough in foreign policy to turn that into a critique of the establishment as he can with wall street.

(Calmly walks away)

QUOTE (2005thxfrthmmrs @ Feb 20, 2016 -> 01:47 PM) They are a young team with a bunch of competitive players. Listening to Steph's interviews, he had his sight set on the record since the early parts of the season. And the fact that they are young and the core players are durable for the most part could mean that resting down the stretch is less important than for a team like the Spurs. The debate that could become interesting is, would 73 wins and the record of most wins of all time be more important and a more impressive feat than back to back titles? And that's not to say that they couldn't repeat if they get less rest down the stretch. That one's easy. No one thinks the 2007 Patriots are the best team of all time, yet they're the only 16-0 regular season in the NFL.

Donald Trump projected with a strong win in the South Carolina primary, currently taking a 35% share of the tallied votes - similar to his NH total and lead. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio currently are in a tight contest for 2nd and 3rd place, both around 20%. Nevada follows on Tuesday prior to 13 states on March 1.

Hillary Clinton wins Nevada. She has now won 2 of the first 3 contests and is currently polling with a strong lead in South Carolina led by strength among African American voters - setting up potential wins in 3 of the first 4.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Feb 18, 2016 -> 12:29 AM) I thought of that distinction, but I honestly don't think it's enough to make a difference. I can't think of anything that would disqualify someone from SCOTUS that would not disqualify them for a Court of Appeals position. The Republicans in the Senate have basically decided that those courts need fewer people over the last year. Said so publicly, at least in the case of the DC one.

QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 18, 2016 -> 06:27 PM) The Nats offer was a fortune and he wouldnt have to put up MVP numbers again to receive it. But they are on a whole other planet when it comes to business decisions then where I am. LOL He turned down a difference of about $30 million guaranteed, per press reports of the Nats deal being about $100m, in exchange for a shot at an extra $50-$100m. Call it the Jimmy Butler game. Jimmy turned down $55 million or so before 2014, and then before 2015 was sitting on $90 million.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 18, 2016 -> 02:24 PM) Yes we are a couple of pieces short. So is the entire AL Central. I don't think we are the leading candidate here, but we sure aren't out of it. The team has been improved a lot during the off-season, and it might be enough. Here is the thing though, even if we can't win it this year, the next off-season is probably going to be one of the best sellers markets in the history of baseball. All you have to do is look at the free agent market and know that teams that are willing to trade assets aren't going to be competing against quality free agents. They are going to be going against the worst free agent market in modern history. In a scenario where the Sox don't make it, AND decide to sell, they can decide to sell short term assets, such as Frazier and Lawrie, or they can go full out rebuild and trade from the starting pitcher stash. If they were to do it, they should be able to control the selling market more than most times. Ok, I've got to ask this because I think I've read this from you several times. Here are 2 scenarios: "The White Sox sell Frazier and one of their pitchers and actually decide to rebuild next offseason" "The White Sox realize their payroll is $15 million less, have $15 million to play with, and pump it all into one more season saying this will be the year!!!!!". They then pay a high price, as in the previous 2 years, to bring in 1-2 players that fill whatever hole they're filling that offseason (RF?). Can you honestly tell me you have any reason whatsoever to believe the White Sox will do anything other than try to be a buyer in a seller's market? Have they done anything to convince you that they'd actually sell under any circumstances other than "in the middle of a 65 win season"? I've seen absolutely nothing from this franchise that suggests they won't convince themselves they're 1 player away next offseason regardless of whether they win 68 or 88 games this year.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 18, 2016 -> 05:54 PM) Cespedes supposedly turned down larger offers from multiple teams. Nothing was reported like that on Gordon as far as I know. Cespedes turned down a larger total offer, at least from the Nats, but in return he got a 1 year optout with a high first year salary. Another MVP type season this year and he'll have turned that into a fortune.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 06:32 PM) Edit...I went back to check my emails from Cowley...it was that I was a Trekkie turned blogger living in a basement. Hi!

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 04:44 PM) But we might still have to face him depending on which NL team it is. Safest way is if a Japanese team offers him a decent contract. But not 19 times per season.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 03:13 PM) Every time you put information on anything digital you are taking a risk that information will be breached. You need to understand that first, if you don't like that risk then you shouldn't place that information out there (and lose the functionality it provides). Are the odds high that this would get breached? Nope. Is there a chance it could be? Absolutely. What would the impacts be if it does get breached? According to Apple it would be astronomical. So, is the risk worth the results? It's not just "get breached". What happens when the Chinese government starts sending in subpoenas for access to data from phones in that country? And they allege someone is a murderer but then just want access to a phone for a political reason?

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 04:23 PM) But wouldn't it also help our pitchers out, as they would no longer have to face him? yeah, edited that in...just don't expect offense out of him The best, of course, would be for some NL team to sign him. Same benefits, no weakened hitter on the roster.

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 01:24 PM) Still think if they don't bring in Desmond or another outfielder, Raburn would be an ideal fit. No one has said it in reply so I will. Bringing in Ryan Raburn would be a terrible idea for the White Sox because he would no longer be able to hit against the White Sox. This would cause a serious decrease in his yearly production. Drop his RBI numbers, for example, by 25%. it would, however, improve our pitching staff.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) They are replacing a pretty poor Samardzija with Latos (probably a plus move) Da f***? "One of these pitchers got $90 million guaranteed. One of these pitchers got $3 million guaranteed. Why on Earth would a national publication writing the supposed conventional wisdom think that swap is a downgrade???" GMAB. Yes, Latos could darn well be an upgrade over Samardzija, but the league just made an $87 million bet that he won't be. These predictions are based on that kind of conventional wisdom.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 01:02 PM) Thibs could easily get hired right now. He is going to pick his spot. Considering the Bulls owe him $9 million, he probably has that luxury. One question, if he was so terrible, and so mean, why did the geniuses who run the Bulls hire him in the first place, and give him an extension? I think he's a spectacular coach but he can only work with certain people and he probably also has a lifespan with organizations. We kinda saw the same thing with Skiles when he was here - absolutely got the best out of his players, was a key part in taking an org that didn't have the leagues best talent and pushing them into the 2nd round, but eventually the personality clashes between him and the team got so bad that the Bulls basically collapsed for a year and were forced to remove him. The Bulls gave Thibs probably the best possible roster for him in 2011-2014. Center like Noah, hard workers like Deng and Butler, guys who would buy in but weren't such big names they dominated everything, guys who would put up with him always being on them, deep bench including "guys Thibs likes for defense", but unfortunately the engine that could make the offense go kept breaking down. Then eventually, players and the org started feeling he was overdoing it, especially when they brought in an all star from outside the org who hadn't had to put up with a coach like Thibs before.

QUOTE (ozzfest @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 10:34 AM) Show me an admin on this board that wants Paxson fired. All of the admins are in Paxson's corner. The thread was closed. Convenient way of shutting down a conversation that you guys don't want to have. I basically wrote a small article the other day with a lot of insightful facts. The thread was not to troll anyone. It was to advocate the firing of a Chicago front office guy who SHOULD absolutely be on the hot seat. It wasn't like I was posting that stuff in Pale Hose Talk. I was posting information within the appropriate thread. Yesterday, I posted the following comment which prompted an admin, who happens to be a big Paxson supporter to blow the whistle and shut the entire thread down: Here is the comment that shut the thread down: "Here is a quote from Kevin Garnett on why he never wanted to play for the Bulls..."If they crapped on the best player in the game, then why would I want to go there? I just felt like...Chicago the management there...its all about them...unfortunately players win championships...not management" Players are again probably noticing how the Bulls treated Thibs and Noah...When players see Pax they know what he did to Vinny...They aren't going to get any FA's for a loooong time." Posting a quote like that is interesting to sports fans. And especially relevant in a thread when discussing Bulls management. What's actually interesting is that a big reason why the "Best player in the game" didn't come there is that Thibs specifically wasn't going to give special treatment to the best player in the game. That was Thibs's game - if Lebron came, Lebron was going to be in a system that worked, but he wasn't getting special locker room treatment, he was going to be a class act like the rest of Thibs's players. He was going to practice hard. He was going to work hard on defense and fit alongside Thibs. The Bulls not landing him was in part because they were working with Thibs's system1 And f*** how the Bulls treated Vinny. He wanted better treatment, he should have tried not being a disaster. If you want to criticize something regarding the time they suffered from VDN, criticize the hiring. That was an a complete utter debacle.

QUOTE (glangon @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 06:06 AM) This season our opening 16 games are:- Oakland (road) 4 games. Cleveland (Home) 3 games. Minnesota (road) 3 games. Rays (road) 3 games. Angels (home) 3 games. So for these 16 games to start the season, where do you see us getting 10 wins or more? That's actually a pretty weak opening 5 series even with 3 of them being on the road. Out of those, there's 1 team I expect to have a winning record and 4 teams that I wouldn't be very surprised to see below .500. Since it's baseball probably at least 1, maybe 2 of them will surprise and be better than expected, but the A's are very young, the Twins are pretty young and they're on paper the weakest team in the Central (they need their pitching staff to return to form and several guys to develop just to make a run at things), the Rays have some talent but look generally like a weaker team in the East, and the Angels have basically Mike Trout and a bunch of prayers. Are they smart enough to just go from Arizona to Oakland without stopping in Chicago first? That'd be some extra helpful sleep.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 07:02 PM) Except then you just get pro forma sessions and thanks to Noel canning nobody can actually be appointed. I know! We just find an appeals court to overturn that! Since the Supreme court is then nonfunctional we'll be able to recess appointment again! (Sadly, that would actually be a very good thing for the country, but that's never the priority).

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 06:01 PM) Drugs, for one. But i'm not saying he's wrong there. My only point was a President can similarly interrupt the democratic process, much in the same way the GOP is threatening to do. Just because a stay was initially ordered and the issue is being litigated doesn't mean it's not happening (i'm not confident at all that we're protecting the border as well as we could)/won't happen. Obama has recourse just like Congress does - they can sue and get the court to determine whether X action is in violation of the constitution. And it gets to the supreme court and a 4-4 decision kicks it back to the Appeals court