NorthSideSox72

I wouldn't write off a guy like Johnson yet, any more than I would Davidson. But in both cases, they need to come out guns blazing next year, or then I do start to think "bust".

QUOTE (farmteam @ Sep 25, 2014 -> 07:36 AM) Maybe I'm reading what you mean wrong, but there seems to be some cognitive dissonance here. Voting with your faith on an issue means you're using that faith to affect other people's lives via law, doesn't it? Via the process - voting. And via speaking. It's a subtle but important distinction, to me. I would never expect a person's faith NOT to effect their political views. But that doesn't mean laws should be written that cater to one specific religion or belief, and effect others from that place.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 04:38 PM) Sending a message about cheating on the field instead of crying about it off of the field? I don't understand this post. Who said anything about crying off the field? He cried ON it, which is what I thought was part of the lameness.

Regardless of people's religious views, it bothers the hell out of me that people continue to want their faith (whatever faith that may be) to have a say in the political process. Your personal beliefs have zero place being put upon other people via the government. Go tell it on the mountain all you want, go vote with your faith and consience on issues, tell your friends, associate with or create groups or organizations to your heart's content. But the minute you expect that your religious beliefs should effect other people's lives via law, you have lost track of the beauty of the Constitution.

So, I like Chris Sale, and I'm obviously a White Sox fan. That said, I have to agree with Ausmus that Sale's actions were pretty weak. Whether it was stealing signs or something else, Sale's reaction was bratty and he should be more mature than that.

QUOTE (MnSoxFan @ Sep 24, 2014 -> 01:48 PM) Good stuff, thanks. Lots of interesting info. Thanks!

FutureSox is looking at the players in the system who led the entire organization in some key statistical categories. First up is hitters, which is right here. As noted in the article, top performers is not the same as top prospects. But it is nevertheless interesting to see who was at the top of these lists. Some unexpected names in a few cases, at least for me.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 02:20 PM) 1) Marketing/sales 2) Marketing/sales 3) Community and public relations 4) Sponsorships 5) Oversee all aspects of the team/front office staff, such as the playing surface (grounds crew), concessions, souvenirs, guest/customer experience, broadcasting and media, etc. 6) Promotions nights 7) Public spokesperson for the team, and also dealing with the major league affiliate about any concern they might have about the facilities/maintenance/clubhouses/field/travel, etc. Basically, it's recognition for the success of the new stadium, and that success came largely DESPITE a terrible season from the team itself. So with minor league GM's, 50-75% of reputation is profitability/attendance. They have absolutely ZERO to do with the product on the field, except for independent leagues...but for the major league affiliates, they're at the mercy of good and bad drafting/Latin America/talent procurement. Not quite zero. They do have involvement in player issues. They are responsible for executing the roster changes sent from the club and the logistics connected to those moves. They work on personnel issues and are responsible in an HR sort of way. They are a conduit between the parent club front office and the minor league players and coaches/managers.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 23, 2014 -> 04:45 AM) You're out of your mind. We might as well bring back Buehrle (greg's dream) and Paulie for one more year, too. No thanks. Although I do think we need a veteran "mentor" of the Jose Molina ilk who can really teach Tyler about the finer nuances of the game defensively. Flowers is already better defensively than AJ was.

Bassitt has shown some flashes that are pretty darn good so far. Especially for a guy who hasn't even seen AAA and missed most of his AA season this year. That said, I think he's a reliever in the long run. His secondary stuff isn't great, his command gets iffy at times, his fastball is above average and can be plus in short play, and he's even said he's more comfortable from the bullpen. So he may very well be a 2015 bullpen candidate.

My personal view is that Snodgress is more likely than Surkamp to get a lefty roll in the 2015 bullpen. I think he's got a better upside for that role.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:32 PM) The intent with just about every trade is to improve the team. This one did not. If Adam Eaton blew out his hammy and Hector Santiago was a Cy Young contender, I bet all of these process people wouldn't have any problem saying it was a bad trade. Trades ultimately aren't determined by the initial intent. Most trades are made with the idea of improving your team. Some are made with he idea of saving money. As far as I know. Kevin Towers intent was to improve his team. Why is it fair game to call his trades poor? Why when people have posted time and time again you need a couple years to judge a trade weren't there these posts that say you judge a trade the moment it is made? The intent is to improve the team? OK. By your own standards... at the time of the trade, nothing occurs. Here a year in, we've replaced one cheap and below average closer with a committee of cheap and below average closers. Davidson does nothing. So as of now, it's a wash. Next year, Reed gets expensive. And Davidson may, or may not, be a contributor. So it could become a good trade, or it could end up remaining neutral. The only way it is a losing trade is if Davidson never contributes AND Reed suddenly becomes an elite closer. So there's a good chance the trade is a wash or a win. And you just keep refusing to acknowledge that you cannot work this entirely in hindsight. At the time it looked like a clear winner. Basically, I fail to see a way this was a losing trade at this point. And it only could be later if those two things I noted earlier both occur, which is pretty unlikely.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:47 PM) Results for phegley danks Wilkins vis a vis Davidson in Charlotte this year don't compute I can't tell what this post even means.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:22 PM) And the example got paid $3.2 million, which is less than Downs and slightly more than Belly. If that is expensive, just wait to you see what Hahn is going to have to spend to fix the bullpen. It would be interesting to see what other offers, if any, they had for Reed. It does boggle my mind there is not 100% agreement the trade did not work out for the White Sox. Of course it hasn't worked out - so far - for the White Sox. But it also has done no harm so far (given that Reed's performance has been lackluster anyway), and it has the potential to be a win going forward. Regardless of that, you evaluate the GM on transactions at the time they were made. I'm surprised there is not 100% agreement that it was a good trade to make at the time it was made.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 11:36 AM) I think it was much improved from the first two. I think I posted my idea for the podcast, in which you guys spend an entire show talking about individual prospects, and affiliates. Yes, we are definitely taking notes on what to do in the future. Next one we might focus on a few specific guys, in addition to any seasonally appropriate stuff. And thanks!

3 pages on this and no one has pointed out one of the key reasons why this trade was a good idea: Addison Reed is now arbitration eligible. He'll make significant money going forward. Last offseason, he had one pre-arb year left - a year in which the Sox had no reason to proiritize the bullpen. Then he's expensive. This made him a perfect guy to trade (in addition to other reasons others have brought up). It was undoubtedly the right move to make.

Thanks for the input, everyone. To be clear, I didn't do a ton of research - just looked at Beaches. If I were to look into this further, I'd do a LOT more research, and these suggestions will help. Also, I saw cheaper rates there, but not for the two-room setup (which, with young kids, is key to me). I was just shocked at that first look. That is insane money for that sort of vacation. Sounds like there are much better deals out there if/when I start looking more in-depth.

Any feedback, from those who listened?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 07:38 AM) Bush's original quotes on CNN: "I most definitely discipline my daughter. I have a 1-year old daughter" "I definitely will try to obviously not leave bruises but I definitely will discipline her harshly depending on what the situation is." Well that's awful. A 1 year old? Christ. Forget even the nerve stuff mentioned earlier - a 1 year old is incapable of even realizing they are doing things wrong most of the time.

Thought about doing something new and different over New Years' week this year. We've never taken the kids (will be 6 and 2.5 then) on a beach vacation type thing, to get some warmth during the winter. So I priced out what it would cost to go to one of those Beaches resorts in like the Bahamas, all-inclusive. They have double rooms so the kids have a semi-seperate room, tons of activities, all that stuff. HOLY BEJEEBUS. The cost for a week for the four of us, not including airfare, was either $23,000 or $17,000, depending on whether or not you got an ocean view. You have got to be kidding me. This wasn't a super high-end room either, this was the lowest level that had that double room. It goes UP from there. So since that is a big fat No F'in Way... anyone here with younger kids do any snow bird sort of trips in winter, to places tropical or beachy? Any recommendations that don't cost A CAR? Looking for a place that would be warm enough that time of year to actually hit the beach maybe, if possible. I'd settle for just warm though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 18, 2014 -> 09:50 AM) If you need a weapon to discipline your children, it means you are a failure as a parent. This.

Podcast is up, thread is pinned in PHT. Closing this one for now.

Dan, Blake and I did our third podcast last night, and it is now uploaded and ready for your listening pleasure. We covered a broad range of prospects and topics in this one. Click here for an outline and a link to the direct download site. You can also search for it on iTunes. We hope to do these more regularly in the future. Feedback is appreciated!

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 17, 2014 -> 11:44 AM) What I was getting at is Keith Law shouldn't be perpetuating the idea that Danish is throwing 93-95. The highest report I've seen in the minors for Tyler is 94. He said he reaches mid-90's, so he's not that far off (in fact 94 IS mid 90's). He's more typically 88-92 of course, but I don't think he's out in space on this one.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Sep 17, 2014 -> 08:38 AM) Mods, am I allowed to post the excerpt about Danish from Keith Law? It's like not even a paragraph. If it is just a few sentences, and you include a link to the full article and it's paywall, I think that is fine.