NorthSideSox72

Kim Contreras' three-part series of in-depth looks at three 2015 draftees concludes with this chapter on catcher Seby Zavala. The 12th round pick has some potential, and there's a lot to like here. She gets quotes from his high school and college coaches, his signing scout, and the White Sox front office. She previously wrote similar articles on Corey Zangari and Jordan Stephens.

It was odd, I asked the Sox about Mitchell last year. My source said they'd get back to me and never did. Wasn't important enough to push it. No idea what was going on there, but must have been more than TJS or something. Also, with him and Ziz, that's a couple fairly recent Top 10 rounds picks being released.

QUOTE (LDF @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:26 PM) i really... really can't wait to read the AA rpt, is it done yet. Well, if you read the article in the original post of this thread, you'll see we kind of did that already.

QUOTE (LDF @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:19 PM) of the minor league teams, i am mostly interested in AA and would love yous guys opinion on the makeup and the strength of the team and the pitchers to watch out for. single A how if there were any surprises and key players to look for in the coming new season. again, yous guys rpt are the best. THanks.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:23 PM) Yes, I see how my question was confusing, I meant what did they do differently in 2015 compared to 2014. But in-season adjustments work too. OK that makes sense - thanks.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 04:05 PM) Which prospect made the biggest adjustment from 2014? Did you mean 2015?

By the way, we are considering a Part 3 where we take reader/follower questions. So if you have questions that you want to ask a roundtable of FS writers, put them in here! Something more than what we think about Player X is preferred - a topic that will generate some differing viewpoints. Let's hear them.

This thread is garbage and I'm closing it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:49 AM) I wonder how many of his employees bring their kids to work every single day? I'm sure all the line workers using sharp tools and heavy equipment in the meat packing plant have their kids there every day.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) It's not 100% a white power symbol, but it very frequently is especially when used as a tattoo: Combined with "88," a common white power reference to 88mm flak guns used by Nazi Germany, it's a 100% lock that she's all about white power. Thanks for the explanation.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:40 AM) I keep reading how this joker LaRoche walked away from the $13M. Well he also walked out on his teammates, too, in the middle of spring training, no less. Now on paper our chances to come back this season and be competitive relied somewhat on his returning to form, and now we don't even have that. And all because the team asked him to cut back on the amount of time his kid spends in the clubhouse. Not a full out ban, just dialing it back a bit, and for that he quits on his teammates. That's the part I find rather inexcusable, and it makes me wonder why the players would even consider going down the road of threatening to boycott a practice or even an exhibition game. It doesn't sound like he had the same level of commitment to them as they may have had to him. That's a good point too. Whether right or wrong to do this regarding his kid, one of the consequences is to abandon his teammates. And at a really lousy time.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:37 AM) The Celtic Cross on her right hand and the "88" on her left hand are white power symbols. Ah. Apparently I'm naive to those symbols being that way. 88 I've never even heard about. But the Celtic Cross, I see that all the time in various Irish uses, so are you sure that's what that one is?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:33 AM) PBS Newshour story on first time Trump voters/volunteers featured this woman: I obviously despise Trump, but, what are you getting at with these photos? I don't think I like where you are going here.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 10:19 AM) I'm not really sure I agree that Ventura should have handled it. It sounds like some of the players are upset with KW over the decision, and I'd rather they were angry with Kenny than with Robin. QUOTE (shysocks @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 10:20 AM) Beat me to it. This is how I see it. QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 10:20 AM) If the story about the team possibly boycotting the game is true, then I'm glad it was KW and not Robin that handled the situation. You really don't want the players and the manager on opposing sides of a controversy. Strongly disagree with these and all the other posts like this. If the manager can't handle tough issues about personnel, then they aren't fit for the job. End of story, for me. That goes for the private discussions, and informing the rest of the team in the right way. No different in any other field of work. Managers sometimes need to escalate matters in any field of work, but if it takes someone two levels up to deal with a culture or rules issue at the staff level, then the that's very bad. Think this through to it's conclusion. KW handles it instead of Ventura, how do the players look at Ventura now? They don't trust him. They don't believe he's strong enough to handle the clubhouse. That ends badly.

The more I hear about this, the more it falls on KW for handling it badly. There are only a few ways this could have started... 1. Kenny did this fully on his own. That's bad - he really shouldn't be interfering in the clubhouse that way. Leave that to the manager, coaches and players. 2. A player (or players) went to KW about it. This is also bad in terms of what it says about Ventura and the players involved. But either way, even if this is what happened, KW's response should have been to go to Ventura, agree on a plan, and have Ventura handle it. Not KW. 3. A player went to Ventura, who escalated it to KW. Same as #2, Ventura should be the one to handle it. It's not about the decision - which was a reasonable and professional one. It is the way it was handled, which sounds like, badly by KW.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 09:18 AM) Ha. Jaw, not draw. Maybe he dropped his drawers.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 16, 2016 -> 04:31 PM) Few things: Yes, I find it ridiculous it takes Trump, a billionaire who has bribed the very politicians he's running against, to do this. The problem though is with politicians accepting money. Trump merely gave it, and has no reason to accept it. The system is completely broken, and Trump, being the foremost expert on it, is the first to admit that. Would Trump be an anomaly? Perhaps. That's why I want him to destroy the Republican party. Connections between corporations and politics would be ruined if he's able to oust the Republican leadership. Those connections would hardly be irreparable so yes, its going to take more than Trump. My hope for Trump is to open the eyes of the voter base and I do believe he's the perfect man to do it. I get people hate his showmanship but it's a huge benefit here. He grabs the attention of absolutely everyone, love him or hate him. Trump has done a great job of calling out Bush, Cruz, Rubio, and now Kasich for their connections but it needs to hit overdrive in the GE. Thanks to Trump, the debates vs Hillary will likely be among the most watched television shows in U.S. history. What better platform than for Trump to come out and tell the world how she took bribes from him as well as expose her as the most calculated political machine of our time. Not going to go full-parse, but on the bolded... you really think this corporate magnate who's known for gaming the system is going to somehow do damage to the influence corporate America has on politics? Because it seems clear to me he'd do the opposite.

Here is the 2nd part of our prospect writers' roundtable discussion. This one covers which affiliates the writers are most excited to watch in 2016 and why, along with which prospects have the most at stake in 2016 to stay on the prospect radar. Which affiliate are you most excited to track? Which prospect has the most to lose or gain this season?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Mar 15, 2016 -> 01:13 PM) Disney announces Indiana Jones 5 for July 19, 2019. Ugh. Please no.

Totally get the Sox on this. Professional and reasonable request. Also totally get LaRoche on this. If this is the way he wants it done, and his office doesn't allow it, he can make a choice. Lots of noise on this, but in the end, I have no problem with either side.

OK, it looks like Missouri could take days to resolve, so I am going to do an update based on some assumptions... BASELINES Total GOP delegates: 2,472 Party-level delegates - unbound: 168 So, voting-linked delegates: 2,304 50.00001% of 2,304 is rounded to 1,153 Total ending delegates to clinch: 1,237 Delegates to clinch a convention-proof nomination: 1,321 CURRENT STANDINGS - total so far: 1,433 awarded (62.2% of voting-linked total) (leaving off the uncommitted/supers for now) *************For Missouri, I am assuming Trump takes it with Cruz getting the districts he has now (39/10/0 for T/C/K) *************For Illinois, same thing on the 66 voting-linked delgates (52/10/4 for T/C/K) Trump: 688 Cruz: 418 Kasich: 143 ---out... Rubio: 169 Carson: 8 Bush: 4 Fiorina: 1 Huckabee: 1 Paul: 1 PERCENT OF REMAINING DELEGATES NEEDED FOR CONV-PROOF MAJORITY (871 voting-linked delegates remaining) Trump: 633 delegates (72.7% of total) Others: mathematically impossible 507 of the remaining 871 voting-linked delegates are WTA or WTM from winner, so 364 proportional delegates of some form. Now, using recent national polls from March among the remaining candidates among LV, with splitting Rubio's votes about evenly between them, you get these likely proportional outcomes... DELEGATE COUNTS PLUS REMAINING PROPORTIONAL USING % ABOVE... Trump (applying 37% to remaining prop and totalling): 688 + 135 = 823 Cruz (34%): 418 + 124 = 542 Kasich (29%): 143 + 105 = 248 NEED TO WIN IN WTA STATES TO CLINCH PRIOR TO NOMINATION Trump: Must win 498 of 507 Everyone else: Mathematically impossible if proportional trends continue So now, Trump is the only one left who can clinch a bullet-proof number prior to convention, and in order for him to do that, if his proportional rate stays about what his overall rate has been and national polling says (plus Rubio portion), he would have to win ALL the remaining WTA delegates to do it. Well, he could lose American Samoa and still make it, but let's be real. WILDCARDS --Rubio's support won't likely be evenly split. One would think his moderate stances align best with Kasich, but he shares common ethnicity with Cruz, and Trump has the winning bandwagon. --The actual results from MO and IL could vary a bit from above. --Almost all the remaining contests are in one of these regions: west coast (which probably best aligns with a moderate like Kasich), northern plains (probably Cruzville), and portions of the northeast (Trump mostly, but PA could like Kasich). Regionality is key now. The south is basically done. UP NEXT I'll wait a few days for new polls without Rubio in the next few states. Those contests are: MARCH 22: American Samoa (9, all open caucus-bound), Arizona (58, WTA, all bound), Utah (40, Winner Take Most, 37 bound, 3 unbound)

Waiting on Missouri to be called before updating the numbers. Rubio dropping out helps Kasich and maybe Cruz as well. Because Trump didn't win Ohio, the chances of a contested convention go up. If Cruz wins Missouri (which seems unlikely), it would all but assure a contested convention. Cruz is in an odd place. A contested convention is basically the only way he can win at this point, and yet he knows he'd be pressured by the establishment and possibly squeezed out at such a convention.

Our weekly stock report, 2nd edition. See who's stock is up, who is down, and who was relegated to the pink sheets.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Mar 15, 2016 -> 03:27 PM) raBBit also pointed out Daniel Vogelbach, Jonathan Singleton, Oswaldo Arcia, and Jesus Montero as potential fits. Would love Vogelbach, except he's not major league ready. Like a year off. Need something more immediate. QUOTE (Dunt @ Mar 15, 2016 -> 03:36 PM) Maybe it's time to see if Davidson can take advantage of an opportunity? He's been over 30% K/PA for two straight seasons at AAA, hitting around .200. He'd be a disaster in the majors right now. I'd rather have Wilkins, or Black, or Ishikawa, or heck even Danny Hayes than Davidson for this particular role right now.

Put this on Twitter, will add it here. Since the big options are all gone... How about Dan Black? Black hit AAA last year at a huge pace, then went to Korea and did the same thing. Gets on base a lot too. Raw power is a 60 grade or better. Excellent plate discipline, good barrel control. When he took BP last year, other players gathered to watch - no joke, he put on a show. On the negative side, he's like a 20 runner, and his defense at 1B is mediocre (though not terrible like it was for a while). He's purely a DH and occasional 1B. But he'd be cheap, and I think the bat and OBP are the real deal.