Balta1701

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Jan 15, 2016 -> 04:29 PM) So does he get the 2.1 million still if he's optioned back to Charlotte? If he were sent down, he would still get that paycheck. However, this contract, like Viciedo's last year, won't be guaranteed until opening day of the regular season, so they could still release him for only a pittance before opening day if they found a massive upgrade like the one they signed last January.

It's plausible he could come up to the big leagues some time this season if there's an injury related opening, but you can't expect him to be a strong contributor. He could fill in and give a couple positive starts perhaps, but like any rookie if he's out there for some time he'll have some down games as well.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 02:52 PM) For an uninformed, only has stats to evaluate guy like myself, what is there to "Get" about Lowry? Big guy, strong frame, was impressed by his work ethic and physical training when I met him. Fastball hits upper 90s, still pretty young for the level he's at.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) Providing an explanation of BABIP every game would be really really intriguing. It's like how exciting it is on a plane when they tell you the safety features. I wouldn't say every game, but it's a number that has meaning. How many different ways can you bring it up? If you're going to show it for a player, why not say why you're showing it?

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 12:52 PM) Kasper and thee lady that did the MLB playoff game seem to think they are talking at a Fangraphs conference when they are doing the game. I would bet less than 10% of the viewing public knows what BABIP means. The medium is between Kasper and Hawk and that is Pat Hughes. Of course, if you're a broadcaster and you're good at your job, you have a 3 hour time block of talking to fill. Explaining why those matter in an interesting way is a way to fill time. It can't be less useful than stories about Yaz.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 11:18 AM) Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 5m5 minutes ago Steve Stone also receives a multi-year extension to call #WhiteSox games. Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 3m3 minutes ago Breakdown for #WhiteSox TV games: Steve Stone 162, Hawk Harrelson 84, Jason Benetti 78. I like that they're giving him a few years to adapt to the position as well. Hawk, of course, can decide when his time to go out is, but it will be nice to have contrasting styles during the year and a chance for him to grow into it. Presumably they'll still have to get some subs for Stone during the year for travel and various holidays so he won't actually be 162.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 03:45 PM) Would you be willing to spend $18.5 million Gonzalez over each of the next two years on the open market? (I don't know why I was under the impression his contract was a lot smaller than this) If yes, would the difference between what you would be willing to give him and what he is getting worth six years of Fulmer? Somehow I feel like Gonzalez return should be more like the return for Todd Frazier, maybe less. As a White Sox GM? Of course, not, but you know how I feel about this team's direction anyway. Here's the logic behind a Fulmer-level return for the Rockies. 1. They don't appear desperate to clear salary (i.e. just signing a 4th OF). 2. They don't "Have" to move him - teams including the Rockies have gone with 4 OFs in recent memory; in 2014 they had 5 players log 35 or more games out there and the guy who only played 35, Cuddyer, was paid $10.5 million for the privilege. 3. And here's the kicker: the Rockies can hold onto CarGo and see if he repeats his MVP-level 2nd half last year. He's a guy who has played better than Frazier for full seasons in his career and last year in the 2nd half he was spectacular. If there's no pressure to move him and he gets off to a good start this year, then he might be talking about Fulmer++ for him because it's a huge midseason upgrade. If you're not going to pay an appropriate price based on what he did in the 2nd half of last year, then they shouldn't move him. There's downside risk to holding him of course, money and injury and performance dropoff, but unless the Rockies are in the "Desperate" to move him category I'd play the upside risk. Maybe I'd give a tiny discount if I were their GM based on health history, but if I'm trading him, I'm trading an OF who put up a .961 OPS and hit 36 home runs after June 1. You want him? You're paying the price for that player. Otherwise I hold him and see if that player is still there in April.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 05:03 PM) The FO made the trade so blame it on the the FO. What differnce is it if it was RH, KW or JR. This was the consensus trade. None of them work by themselves. The problem is that those 3 are still making the decisions.

QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 03:32 PM) There's no way the Rockies are getting a pitcher the caliber of Quintana from anyone, Sox or otherwise, for CarGo. Recent deals and signings make that pretty clear imo. The conversation from the Sox side should start with anyone other than ANderson/Fulmer. Frankly, if they can't get a Fulmer level player for him as the centerpiece of a multi-player deal they should hold him until the deadline.

QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 03:28 PM) Or should they just pay Fowler and use the leftover $$ to sign a solid starting RHP? Leaves Melky in LF, but does get Avi off the diamond. That assumes the leftover $$ would get a "solid starting RHP". If the dollar amount for one of the current OFs is $18m (Gordon range), and Fowler is still in the $10-$12 million range (he's outperformed Parra the last couple years and the next-year projections like him better) what RHP are you going to get for $6-8 million that is a solid starter?

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 03:02 PM) The Cubs have no CF. Why then are they not bringing this guy back? Sign Austin Jackson. Forget Fowler. At least Jackson has played most of his career in pitchers' park; Fowler the opposite. They signed Heyward and were pretty clear their OF to start the year is going to be Schwarber, Heyward, and Soler.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 02:26 PM) Good...the only people who really win those class action suits are attorneys. Everyone else gets screwed. Their has to be a better way to actually get the penalties into the right hands. I don't know what it is, but their has to be a way. Step 1. Get rid of class action lawsuits. Step 2. Figure out a better way to deal with cases where large numbers of people are screwed. I'm sure step 2 will happen once step 1 is done, right?

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Jan 11, 2016 -> 10:15 PM) I think it's probably the right move. Also, he's unlikely to move on and likely to use the Gase system. For anything you want to complain about, John Fox has a very strong record of moving coaching talent upwards. Gase started as Denver's WR coach for 2 years, then was their QB coach for 2 years, then moved up to OC and now is off to head coach. He replaced Mike McCoy who had the same path - QB coach, then coordinator, then in-demand HC candidate. That shouldn't be an unexpected promotion and it's hard to say Fox hasn't earned some benefit of the doubt on promoting his coordinators from within when they're all hired as head coaches within 2-3 years.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 12:11 PM) The records of teams in these predictions, even teams they are predicting to win the division, are always awful. Does anyone really think all 5 teams will be separated by 7 games in the standings? Generally these predictors are conservative; they don't often predict 100 win teams or 60 loss teams. To do that in the predictions, you have to be unbelievably loaded or unbelievably terrible.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 11:13 AM) Don't remember exactly but I think most systems had us between 76 and 80 wins. Steamer had the white sox at 78-84 last year.

Since they're taking down fences because the government shouldn't interfere with cattle grazing, this is where my part comes in. This basin is in the middle of a desert, it receives on average about 10 inches of rain per year. However, Lake Malheur is a large lake maintained by runoff from snowmelt in mountains to the west and particularly to the South off of Steens Mountain, a pile of faulted volcanic rock. (Interestingly, the main river that supplies water is the Donner und Blitzen River, just had to note that). Cattle ranching in this area began in the late 1800s when laws were changed in California that gave fixed agriculture better access to land and water resources than cattle ranching. Ranchers moved out to other states, including Oregon. They settled in this area and set up ranches. In the process, they took much of the water supply that otherwise flowed into Lake Malheur, and two smaller lakes knwon as Mud Lake and Harney Lake. The bottom of those lakes is filled with fine-grained, glacially-ground sediment that is covered with salt; the inflowing water carries lots of salt with it that binds to sediments as it sinks. This mixture of salty, fine-grained sediment is terrible for people to breathe and a major pollution hazard; it also carries trace metals and other nasty things with it. While there is a lake on top of the sediment, the lake water keeps it buried, but if you bring it to the surface, it becomes a rapid environmental disaster. The Malheur Wildlife Refuge was established in 1908 IIRC, but it only covered the lake area, it didn't include the water supply. As the water supply was used up in ranching, water to the lake trickled and the lake volume began decreasing. As the lake volume decreased, the fine-grained sediment at the bottom parched and was exposed to the wind. This sets up and creates dust storms, which impact the climate of the local area and can bury and kill vegetation and ranches. Similar examples include the now-desertified Aral Sea in the former Soviet Union and Owens Lake in California, which became a gigantic environmental disaster after Los Angeles stole its water supply. The lack of water inflow into the lake was literally on the verge of killing ranching in the entire area. In the mid 1930s, the Federal Government finally was able to purchase the main water supply heading into the lake, and as water inflow resumed, the lake volume increased and the desertification of the area was avoided. From that point, ranching gradually recovered over the next several decades until in the 1960s it reached a point where the government began limiting the amount of ranching because they have that authority and they control the water supply. This, of course, is an unconstitutional set of limits on ranching in the area to these people and so now they're cutting down fences because the government has no right to limit ranching on that land. The irony, of course, is that had the government not stepped in and limited ranching in that area, there would be zero ranchers or anyone else living in that now desertified, uninhabitable, dust-covered area.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Jan 11, 2016 -> 07:11 PM) A good case study would be to see how players wRC+ splits compare before and after leaving the Rockies. Take Tulo, Holliday, etc. and see how their road wRC+ changed being a Rockie, and in their new home. You could do it for guys like Morneau who became a Rockie after life elsewhere. Without actually doing the work, and buying into your second article, I'm guessing you find the home numbers comes down a bit, and the road numbers come up to a greater degree. This would mean overall wRC+ might actually come up after leaving Colorado. Biggest part of the problem is that for the big name guys there's not enough data to really say it with confidence and other things muck stuff up. For example, Troy Tulowitzki was surprisingly awful with the bat in Toronto last year even before he got hurt. RC+ declined from 104 to 91. What will he do next year? I don't know yet. Holliday is an interesting case. When he left Colorado for Oakland his RC+ declined from 141 to 123. But then he went back to the NL in the 2nd half of the season and his RC+ shot back up to 168. Did he just hate playing in Oakland? Did he just really know NL pitchers better? Or could it be that there's an adjustment time once you leave Coors to get your swing into a mode that works elsewhere? Morneau had a 107 RC+ last year, but that was in I think the reality is that there's way too many "mitigating factors" to say we have a 100% confident trend. If you had to guess you'd say his production would dip down some but not hugely, but with both upside chances and downside risk. Dexter fowler left and his batting improve while his defense took a nose dive, then he went to chicago and his defense recovered but his bat weakened. There are some guys who declined more seriously, but some of them were players who were already struggling in Colorado. Unfortunately there's no easy answer. The Rockies bats should not be as good at home and as bad on the road as they actually are unless there is a huge effect of players acting differently, but there's enough complication that there's no easy trend when players arrive and leave. Most of the time you expect you're ok trading for one, but there's always going to be a risk involved. How much risk are you willing to take? If it turns out that Cargo can't adapt his game well outside of Coors next year, is our roster ok with that? Are we hanging our entire season and several future seasons on that chance?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 11, 2016 -> 02:12 PM) They wear his jersey, more than any other Steeler. They also talk here about his 2010 suspension as though it was a case of RG being unfair. Came up a lot when they were talking about Brady last spring. I completely disagree with any assessment of that being unfair and think that's a perfect case for the commish to have that power, personally.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 11, 2016 -> 01:57 PM) Neither myself not any of the people I was having my original discussion with are big enough hockey fans to know enough about Kane to compare him to Ben. that's just the example I gave for this site. Basically, that's the reason I can think in this case we have something actually bad that happened and went unpunished. The prosecutor told us so. He released everything.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 11, 2016 -> 12:59 PM) Got into a very long/heated "discussion" on FB Sunday about Ben's past and whether or not it should affect one's decision to be a fan of the team. Predictably, the Steelers fans got very defensive and constantly trotted out: 1) Ben never got convicted or even charged, they were just allegations 2) almost every team, pro or college, has at least one player with some level of domestic violence accusations against them so why single out the Steelers My responses: 1) Ben was never charged but the allegations were from multiple women in different places at different times which to me, even though charges were never filed, is more serious than a single unsubstantiated allegation 2) A QB of a professional team has a higher level of notoriety than other NFL players, who in turn have a higher level of notoriety than any college player (who is gone is Any thoughts? Without dealing with the other stuff people went after you for...compared with, for example, the Patrick Kane case, there's a huge difference to me in the the Roethlisberger one. There's a public, district attorney produced investigation document. Basically on the date the investigation report was released, the DA stood up there, said he thought a crime happened, but said that he did not have enough to bring charges at least in part because the actual victim was hesitant to go through with the public spectacle of prosecuting a football star when she was quite drunk during the event so she was going to come out looking bad too. We have that document, including summaries of witness statements, evidence, statements from others present, etc.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 04:26 PM) I am guessing it was a long drive home. The snow has already mostly passed.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) That .772 OPS was also with high K and a low OBP. See nothing to suggest that he's the position player equivalent of top of the rotation. I wouldn't make that sort of move if I were in the white sox organization's place either. However, a team like Texas, with confidence in their coaching staff's ability to work with people to get them to reach their talent level, a deep organization that regularly produces big leaguers even if they still have a need in CF so that they have surplus guys to move, and a desire to compete in multiple years, this could be a solid move for them. Get a guy under team control a number of years in a tough position to find a decent bat, hopefully after the Marlins did the hard work of giving them a chance to struggle through their early years. The Sox certainly couldn't give up one of their pitchers for him then have him be a failure.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 02:44 PM) No. I like Trump because he's outspoken and says whatever he wants then he denies saying it later. He's like a parody of politics. Most of what he says I feel he doesn't even believe. I'm not saying he's perfect. I am saying a lot of good people just are sick of politics and don't want 8 years of Hillary or Jeb, etc. People also want to feel safe and want to be able to make some money in life. I'm not into the Jesus analogy today. Trump's never going to build that wall. It's all hyperbole. Like I said he makes s*** up. Who cares? They all lie. Including Hillary. I disagree. I live life by the Golden Rule and try to be a good person at all times. And I like Trump. I don't think I'm despicable because of fondness for Trump's style. So you're fond for a person lying to you by your own admission? And you think that disgusting lies are ok because they're lies. Congrats, that's awful. "It's all lies. But they're lies about people who look wrong. And in the end, isn't that the real truth?"

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 02:44 PM) .691 OPS, with high K and low OBP.....for a #1 starter. How about for E Johnson...maybe a .772 OPS and 23 HR as a 23 year old in center field. If you think he's the guy he was last year, then EJ is an appropriate price offer. If you think he can develop and build on that 23 year old season, then you offer up a possible top rotation guy for him.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 01:56 PM) I dont understand the top 100 status on Gonzalez. This is my point. Look at what he has done in the minors and his stint in the majors. If anything, he's put up similar numbers to Danish at all levels. For some reason BP is much more bullish on him than seemingly most other places, but some differences with Danish are that Gonzalez's fastball averages 93 where that's Danish's peak, and when he was pushed upwards quickly he was in the big leagues within 2 years of being drafted rather than at AA (high school/college guy difference). Danish relying on a quirky delivery might be another part, but hard to know. BP has guys who even late last season were saying he had a more promising future than Rodon. I'm not sure why, but apparently there's something about him that the people at BP adore.