southsider2k5

To be honest? The bottom tax rate is meaningless. NO one actually pays that tax rate. By the time all of the deductions are taken, especially the EITC, most people who would fall into the 10% bracket are actually paying a negative tax rate. The bottom 50% of earners in this country pay an average income tax of about 3% versus the 28% at the top 0.1% or 27% at the top 1%. That also means that any cuts of the lowest income tax bracket are practically worthless. People in those ranges aren't paying any of those taxes anyway. Politically, it is so stupid to even think about raising the bottom rate. It isn't like you are going to raise an appreciable amount of income anyway as long as the deduction structure we have in place now sticks around. The blowback you get from it will destroy any help to the bottom line that this would raise.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 05:25 AM) https://www.yahoo.com/news/immigration-hard...-015354176.html Here comes the wall (without even a Congressional vote to get it started) and immigration round-ups... http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/16/politics/tru...ders/index.html All the areas where Trump will be at odds with Ryan/GOP Congress https://www.yahoo.com/news/giuliani-favorit...-082235190.html Transition team already struggling...but great, we've spooked RMB down almost to 6.9 and freaked out the mortgage markets as well. (And Jared Kushner's running off all the former Christie aides because of the vendetta he's held ever since the Christie administration went after his father.) The irony here is the Chinese want the RMB to stay in the 6.4-6.5 range, and are fighting to strengthen/preserve its value against speculators shorting it, instituting numerous capital controls on currency leaving the mainland. Doesn't matter...stock market's doing great, so God continues to bless the 1% The irony of course is that Obama's opinion completely changed once he was in charge. I fully expect the same epiphany to happen to Trump once his advisors get ahold of him. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...rds_125489.html

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:58 AM) Hypothetically, would you be happy with a Sale for Moncada and Benintendi deal? The Sox would only get 2 guys back for Sale but both have superstar potential. How far ahead does that actually get us? We should very clearly be shooting way higher than two starters. We have had a group of great stars and relative crap otherwise, and that has got us no where. Young stars and other crap doesn't advance this franchise at all.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:54 AM) Not necessarily. If, say, two of them turn into all-stars, I'd say we did just fine. Unless one of them is a star on the level of Sale, it is a failure. The whole idea is to fill a lot of holes. If you have a big step down in quality from an ace pitcher, and only fill two holes, it is a bust.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:51 AM) Would it be possible to merge all the Sale threads together? There's like 3 or 4 different topics relating to him and it's a pain to have to check each one individually. Nothing is concrete at this point so I think it'd be better to have 1 thread dedicated to Sale rumors. Nope. No catch all. Each rumor gets it own thread.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 02:55 AM) That's a given and so is Lux but I need a given bat that I can plug into my lineup for the next 10-12 years Bats, plural. We need to pull at least three good solid starting players from a Chris Sale deal, otherwise it is a complete failure.

QUOTE (peavy44 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 08:15 PM) Maybe none of these teams won't overpay for chris sale.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:48 AM) I just don't see Turner going anywhere. It's one thing for a GM to liquidate 3-4 of his top 10 prospects for a guy like Sale. It's another thing completely to send off a young player the general fanbase has already latched onto as a star of the future. The consolation prize is Chris Sale.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:14 AM) Remember when the other parts of that trade helped the Sox win the division in 2000? Caruso wasnt the only player in that trade that made the majors, Howry and Foulke had pretty good careers and both of them were key parts of the 2000 team. Look, i understand people are worried about a rebuild. It is risky and there are no guarantees. But insinuating that the Sox shouldnt go down that path because of a trade that happened almost 20 years ago is ridiculous. Yeah, Caruso wasn't the key to the deal, he was just the major league ready part.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 07:56 PM) My first thought on this is that if you trade BOTH this offseason you're competing against yourself & end up hurting your return. Obviously whoever gets Sale won't be in the running for Q or vice versa. On another note, waiting to trade the second until next trade deadline or next offfseason would open them up to a whole new crop of prospects. You never know who will emerge next season in the minors, so staggering the trades over a year could have strategic merit too. Yeah, I wouldn't be trying to deal both at the same time, but there is nothing to stop you from dealing one, and then going to the teams that missed out with the other pitcher.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:29 AM) I think Washington is actually better suited than Boston with Turner and Giolito. Yeah, both are basically major league ready, that is for sure.

Interesting. I never expected him to actually follow through on this. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...transition-team

QUOTE (Pants Rowland @ Nov 16, 2016 -> 09:22 AM) I'm sorry, but it is pretty obvious to me that Greg is one of 3 things: -The best troll on this site -7 years old -an intellectual man boy I am not sure why anyone continues to respond to this farce. But are you willing to bet your house on it?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 07:12 PM) The entire foundation of "Hahn's good at this" is Eaton for Santiago...and if you're willing to give him (instead of KW and Paddy) credit for Jose Abreu. Who's the one within the Sox organization who pushed hardest for Anderson? We all have this scenario where KW was directly responsible for former footballer Courtney Hawkins, but why wasn't he equally responsible for Anderson, another raw/toolsy guy with more of a hoops background as a youngster? I don't get the need to cannibalize the White Sox front office in these matters. They are a unit. The succeed or fail together. Even if one person "pushed" for a certain player, it takes a group effort from the scouts all of the way up to the top of management, and then back down through development to make A Tim Anderson happen. I know the movement these days is to get everything into a simple of a form as possible, but taking a college kid and turning him into a major league baseball player isn't just "who pushed hardest".

Vincent Goodwill ‏@vgoodwill 2h2 hours ago Rondo is questionable with a sore left ankle tonight

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 03:34 PM) Thanks. How did you find this? Saw it in my facebook feed.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 03:18 PM) Yes. It was a cleanup. Said to be ready for spring training I believe they said rehab was like 4 weeks or something to the effect.

http://athletics.bellarmine.edu/news/2016/...ganization.aspx

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 03:01 PM) Perhaps I don't actually see Atlanta being willing to part with what it would actually take to get a deal done though A package of Swanson, Albies, Newcomb and Soroka certainly gets the conversation serious That would round out the Sox infield with some combination of Swanson/Anderson/Albies covering 3B, SS and 2B plus two young pitchers with starting potential Zack Collins will need time to develop, but ideally he could stay at catcher Like I said previously, I think the Braves could put together a good enough package, but if the top teams wanted to do so, they could easily beat it.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 02:53 PM) Buddy Bell isn't involved in acquisitions and evals he's in charge of overseeing the development of players in the minor leagues. The people involved in this process are: 1.) KW/Hahn - negotiations, deal framework, risk diversification, money, etc. This has been mostly Hahn since even before he took over as GM. That doesn't mean he isn't acting under the direction of his boss though. Hopefully were past that. 2.) Jeremy Haber/Dan Fabian - Haber weighs in on evals and makes player recs. Fabian is the head of all analytics adding support or guidance where needed. 3.) Professional scouts - The guys who were scouting any player the Sox may potentially acquire back in July-September. They also scout the prospects in the AFL. 4.) Amateur scouts - They weigh in on guys who were recent draft picks. So for instance, the Southeastern amateur college scouts would give their notes on Benintendi and they would be vetted against the scouts in the Eastern League or more likely, the Carolina League who watched Benintendi this year. Plus you have a lot of scouts who are either higher in rank or assigned to cold or less fruitful areas who watch players like, say Cody Bellinger, in his high school showcases or National exposure games. 5.) Marco Paddy - If the Sox are trading with the Dodgers and Yadier Alvarez was in play, they'd call Marco Paddy who told me he specifically saw Alvarez when he was still in Cuba. 6.) Dan Stritmatter (sp?) - He handles video coordination and works hand-in-hand with Fabian. If they wanted to find tape of a lesser known guy who's rounding out a package this is where they turn. The Sox FO's has been inadequate in plenty of different ways over the years. Even so, as much as the lazy narratives around here would lead you to think it's just Kenny Williams, Rick Hahn and in your case, Buddy Bell, just sitting in an office bulls***ting up a package that's simply not the case. They have been working and preparing for a trade with at least the Red Sox and Dodgers for almost a half year. Given what I was told around the deadline that never came into fruition, they've probably been set and prepared to sell just didn't get the okay from management until this offseason. This is great insight. Thank you.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) His ceiling is very high, no doubt. I am concerned about the risk of having such a young player be a centerpiece of a deal though. The Sox farm system has not had great success in developing this sort of player from a young age all the way to the majors I like Swanson + Albies as a centerpiece of a trade that includes pitching as well Maitan is too raw and the bust potential worries me too much in a Sale deal unless he is a 3rd or 4th piece Swanson would be the centerpiece and the low floor player of the deal. Maitan would be 1A in the deal.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 02:18 PM) Maitan has a high ceiling, but I would rather receive more proven talent that has less risk than a teenager I get multiple teams involved and let the bidding WAR commence. You never know what you might be offered, but it's a given that the Sox will end up receiving a king's ransom if they choose to move him This kid is being billed as a once in a generation talent. He is absolutely someone who is a must if the Sox do indeed swing a deal with Atlanta. He would instantly be our top prospect, with no one else particularly close, even at age 16. http://www.baseballamerica.com/internation...s1tVklhESAKj.97

CSN Chicago ‏@CSNChicago 10m10 minutes ago Nick Schmaltz likely playing, Corey Crawford starting vs. Jets: http://bit.ly/2fS87MH (@TramyersCSN) #HawksTalk

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 01:31 PM) I think this is a poor way to evaluate a potential trade. You have to look at the entire package and not just the centerpiece. Honestly, it probably doesn't matter, because I don't think Friedman will give up Urias. Hope I'm wrong, but I know I wouldn't if I was Friedman unless it was practically a straight-up swap. In this case the #1 player in the trade is barely more important than the #2 -> #5 players. This deal is all about rebuilding depth and quality in an organization that has stars and no depth. If you aren't getting 3 to 4 starters out of this deal, you have blown it.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 15, 2016 -> 01:23 PM) Heyward had a lot more of a track-record and is more physically gifted, so I think people see him as a guy who could have even expanded from there. Eaton's track record is still good, just not the long span that Heyward had. Heyward has essentially 4 seasons of 6 WAR (a few just a bit above and one that I'm counting that was at 5.8). That is in his first six seasons. His last two entering free agency were a 6.2 and a 6.5 and was only going to be 26 during the first year of his contract. Eaton, to his own defense, has put up a 5.2 and a 6.2 in two of the last three years and even his down year was a 3.9. Case in point, not a ton of difference necessarily between the two, just one had a longer track record and a bigger reputation, but both are damn good players. I'd say that Eaton was far more underappreciated but part of that is Heyward was so hyped coming up, etc. If Adam were a free agent this year, he'd get a big contract ($100M plus for sure). You can see why teams would want him, but we also have years of control over him and I would hope intend to compete during the reign where he'd still be in his "prime" years. Either way, Adam Eaton is a good problem to have. If the market dictated that Heyward was a $184 million player, I have to say that Adam Eaton would be at least $150 million on the open market.