NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Jan 26, 2016 -> 12:12 PM) We don't have a wealth of high end prospects, so we probably don't have the ammo to snare a star, however, we still have guys that could be pieced together similar to the trades that have been made the past couple years. I would say we have two categories of trade value, high floor depth pieces and raw lottery tickets that other teams would be attracted to Depth: May, Beck, & Peter Lotto Ticket: Adams, Michalzcewski, Danish, Guerrero, Adolfo, Zangari, Stephens, & Hickman Hickman isn't getting traded. He's recovering from TJ and is already raw for a pitcher. He has no trade value, but could turn into something - you hold onto those guys, and no team will value him in any significant way.

1. Trading away Intl slot money would be pretty dumb, especially with 10 teams out of the big bonus pools this year and the Sox having a chance to rake in some talent. 2. Depends on what you mean by value. Outside Anderson-Fulmer-Adams, no one in the system is an elite talent. They aren't headliners for big pieces. They could help in a package, or maybe get you something decent when grouped together, but not any blockbusters. The Sox certainly have the armament to, say, get one of the Colorado outfielders. But it would also further strip an already-thin system.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 26, 2016 -> 09:18 AM) That Keon Barnum pick is looking so bad. QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 26, 2016 -> 10:06 AM) I remember it being ridiculed the moment it was announced. One-tool player, and the one tool hasn't shown up much in games. Not a great career thus far. He's also not very good at first base defensively from what I've heard.

Speaking of Northern Iowa... they beat North Carolina and Iowa State... but lose at home to Loyola and Drake, with the latter blowing them out? Now that's an odd team.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 26, 2016 -> 08:01 AM) BP is severely overrating Anderson and underrating Fulmer, IMO BP has consistently been much higher on Anderson than other publications. Started with Jason Parks, who is now a scouting supervisor with the Cubs.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 25, 2016 -> 02:21 PM) Has anyone been to New Zealand? Planning an outdoorsy trip there in April with my sister for three weeks. Tentatively planning on hitting Tongariro, Tai Poutini, Kepler Track, Milford Sound, and Fiordland. Rob my man, we should talk. I spent two weeks there with my wife in 2008, did two tracks with touristy stuff in between. Did the Dusky Track (the most wild of the wilderness tracks) in Fiordland, which was tough as hell but absolutely stunning. Then did the Marlborough Sounds trail, which was easy and you just hiked a trail from resort to resort each day while they take your bags to the next one for you.

As we've done the past few years, after we publish the Top 30 Prospects lists, we also write two articles called Next Wave. These highlight 8 to 12 position players, then the same number of pitchers in a second article, that didn't make the Top 30 list but who could jump onto the radar in 2016. A bunch from the last version are now ranked, and some from those lists have made the majors. Here is the 2016 Position Players edition. Pitchers will come out in a day or two. Any of these guys interesting to you? Anyone else you would have included?

So yeah, I give up trying to figure out who this Iowa State team is. They've beaten 3 of the top 4 teams in the country, and two more ranked teams at the time they played them. They also lost at home to Baylor, neutral court to Northern Iowa, and at Texas (their 4th loss, at OU by only a few points, is respectable).

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 25, 2016 -> 08:03 PM) Many see his ceiling as a reliever, so he won't be ranked very high. I haven't seen anyone say that. What I've seen is that people think he'll be a reliever due to his high effort, almost violent delivery. Stuff-wise, most seem to agree that a very good late inning reliever is his probable floor. QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 26, 2016 -> 01:51 AM) For some reason I was thinking Fulmer was #1 on everyone's White Sox list. Mostly it is Anderson, though in a close race with Fulmer. Our vote was super-close, I know BA wrestled with the decision too.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 24, 2016 -> 10:23 PM) Which is funny, because he ignores EVERYONE who had a chain in this mess up until he gets to the ONE Republican in the line, the Governor, who knew about it last and had absolutely nothing to do with its inception. The local Democrats in the town council? Ignored. The government agencies like the EPA and so on that knew about this? Nothing. But the Gov/ IMPEACH HIM! Blame to go all around, though it's worth noting the EPA did in fact fire some people and even admitted to stunningly poor oversight and decision-making in their own agency. I have see nothing like that from the governor, or the state water commission or anyone else.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 23, 2016 -> 04:41 PM) The discussion is frequently made that the earth goes through normal heating and cooling cycles. Some will still insist that there isn't a problem because it can occur naturally. I'm not saying I agree but much of the arguing revolves around is there truly a problem, regardless of the data. And it does go through those cycles. Though this cycle doesn't profile like the others. But really, no matter your belief in how much of this is human caused, there are things we know can help mitigate the effects on the human population - both in terms of slowing the warming, and in reactions to the effects of it.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Jan 23, 2016 -> 11:56 AM) Look forward to this this every year, great read as always. Really hope the Sox give Coats a look in ST this year. He quietly put up a very solid year in Charlotte and I think he could be a decent 4th OF in the majors. My personal feel is that Coats is a competent 4th OF right now, but with room for being a starter somewhere. Much like Thompson, though with different strengths and weaknesses. If the Sox don't upgrade the OF this offseason or early in the season, it's not out of the realm of possibility he could be with the Sox this season. Shuck is fine as a 4th OF but isn't anything special either, and I believe Coats could be more at this point. Sands is in the mix too, but he's purely a platoon bat.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 04:32 PM) Cruz is not presidential material. He's like a Trump lite with a politician's tongue. Sanders would mop the floor with Cruz. Pretty sure Sanders would wipe the floor with Trump too. It's all pretty amazing. The GOP is facing this possibility (which I still think isn't the most likely, but is possible) that their nominee could be completely unelectable, and even have a serious negative effect down-ticket. IF they're lucky, they can keep both Bush and Cruz under 50% of delegates, go to a brokered convention and line up for a moderate candidate. That's assuming Cruz and Trump don't collapse, which I think they likely will before that point. If either of them do win the nomination by some amazing event, it guarantees a Dem President and serious Dem pickups in Congress.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 03:53 PM) These guys are in armed insurrection against the US Government. Give them a public 24 hour notice to surrender and then be prosecuted for treason, or face the consequences and probably death when the military comes in after them. Hell I'd even be OK with a drone strike with a hellfire if they were worried about people getting killed taking back the facility against these traitors. Agreed (though it's sedition, not treason). Also, not a lot of things surprise me anymore, but I have to say I am surprised they have let it fester this long. They've gotten way too comfortable, and it is all kinds of bad to let is sit and stink for this long.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 12:08 PM) yeah, after they 'adjusted' down the temps from the previous hottest year on record, 1997. citation? Also, really, who cares if it's 1st or 2nd. Point is more that the climate continues to warm. Regardless of how much of that is human-caused in your view, the reality is in the numbers. It's warmer and keeps getting warmer. That will have effects, pretty serious ones soon.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:21 AM) All rallies should be sold......SPX broken....Wilshire 5000 Broken......Hope and Central Bank stimulus is not a strategy.......The debt in this world cannot and will not be paid back.... I feel like I've been reading these same posts from you for, oh, a decade. You were right for a few months around 2007-2008 - at least about selling the rallies anyway.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 08:20 AM) Nate Silver's new premise....GOP establishment is even more concerned with Cruz winning http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/one-bi...tical-of-trump/ Yeah that's the biggest problem. If it was Trump, but with someone moderate right behind him, that's more ideal. At this point I'm sure they are hoping that as other candidates drop off, someone like Rubio or Bush will be taking up those votes and present a real challenge to the nutballs.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 08:08 AM) Conservative magazine National Review published their latest issue with 22 anti-Trump essays. The RNC promptly returned the favor by disinviting NR as a debate partner. Looks like at least some of the Republican establishment is warming up to Trump as nominee. I still doubt he can win. With the field this wide, the problem Trump has is that he's got a rabid following, but people who aren't within that following won't go to him as candidates drop off. It's polar when it comes to Trump. Iowa will cause some candidates to drop off, but those votes won't be distributed evenly.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 05:20 PM) The "not cleared" part is the point - that's what kept them "marginally regulated" as you say it here. That's what is being lumped in together as "Shadow banking" - it's avoiding the regulation of traditional banks through avoiding the "clearing" process as you define it here. You're making a language distinction when the distinction is really unimportant - "Shadow banking" is being used as the catch all since, as you say, it is "full of shades of grey". The reason why there's a "Shadow" is that it is "lightly regulated" through the fact that it's not being exposed to the regular market regulation that would fit that kind of transaction if the institution were a normally regulated bank/insurer. Key distinction to make on the bolded. With swaps, most of the time, the swaps had either one or both sides as regular banks. What was missing was a clearing house that acted as the insurer against payment failure. In other words, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers would do swaps, but with no intermediary agent. For the buy-protection side, they were then able to characterize the underlying instruments as risk-free, when really they were just transferring the risk from the bond obligator to the institution on the other side of the swap. So it wasn't necessarily that the institutions making the deals were unregulated - it was that the transaction was a transfer of risk, accounted for as a buy-away of risk. More than anything, it was about a lack of insurance and some accounting wizardry.

By the way, Hickman says he'll be in AZL in 2016 when he is ready. He said "Arizona all year", FWIW. So while the year will be key for him development-wise, we probably won't see him face full season league hitters until 2017.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 04:56 PM) I read this and was extremely confused because as far as everything I have ever seen "OTC Swaps" you're referring to "ARE" part of the shadow banking system. I can even take this from the Wikipedia entry on "Shadow banking system" That's basically the given definition of "Shadow banking" - performing the services of a traditional financial institution, like selling insurance, but doing so in a way that is outside the traditional regulatory stream. Every definition of an OTC swap or OTC transaction for that matter that contributed to the 2008 collapse basically fits that definition - it's a transaction conducted outside the traditional regulatory stream by keeping it "over the counter". Here's the Economist using the language interchangeably. OTC is not the same as unregulated. It means not cleared. Key difference. Those swaps were lightly regulated, and not cleared. The definition of shadow banking is by nature full of shades of grey, but it seems to me that a business with trillions of dollars in motion via legally binding contracts between registered financial institutions doesn't qualify. By the way, I am not saying there isn't a problem with banking activities in unregulated or marginally regulated spaces. It is an issue. However I don't consider the problem of uncleared OTC swaps as part of that.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 08:03 AM) For me, Matt Cooper. He's interesting, but still a real long shot. His parlor trick with the offspeed pitches can work if his fastball can truly be low 90's and have some kind of plane on it, as well as the ability to deliver it with a consistent arm speed to the breakers. If all that comes together, he could be an effective major league reliever.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 05:03 PM) Well, considering the disruption it cause, you don't think it's fair to ask what it actually accomplishes? Of course it is. But Krugman turned it into a straw man argument - no one is saying it fixes everything. And he justifies it by pointing to a factor that's maybe not in the top 3 causes of the meltdown, because it's the highest on the list that wouldn't be at least partially addressed by Glass Steagel.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 07:15 AM) Strictly a question meant for discussion: I havent seen Engel play, so I dont know if it's a decent comp, but I look at Kevin Kiermaier and think that they have the same sort of skill set. Is that a bad comp? I don't know Kiermaier's tools quite well enough to say for sure, but I'd say Engel will probably draw more walks, but also strike out more, and steal more bases. Engel is a true plus-plus runner, which is very rare. Defensively, Kiermaier is about the best there is, so I think that's a stretch for Engel but he does have the right raw tools for it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 04:21 PM) That was a particularly dumb criticism of Krugman's. It's the same sort of terrible argument used against all sorts of programs that nobody actually believes are magic fix-alls. I'm not a big consipracy theory guy, but that exerpt reads like some sort of defense of Hillary Clinton's positions on the topic. Not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg though.