southsider2k5

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 6, 2016 -> 11:48 PM) Er, Alomar is an ex-Sox player. As is Martinez. Yes 2-2.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Aug 6, 2016 -> 11:14 PM) Or does it mean that in rookie ball many if the 18 year olds are swinging at everything. While it good to see him do well, I don't trust big performances in rookie ball. I would wait until he has a couple of season against older competition before proclaiming his delivery improved, unless of course there has been videos or live reports of the changes. How many players get a ton better moving from college to rookie ball?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 6, 2016 -> 01:55 PM) It's not just about him dominating, it's also the fact he's barely walking anyone. Him being in rookie ball shouldn't take anything away from that. This. It means he is able to repeat his delivery with consistency, which was a major problem for him this season at OU.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Aug 5, 2016 -> 11:15 PM) To be fair, top college pitches should do well in rookie ball. Obviously it's a great sign that Hansen is torching the league with GF, but until he starts doing really well at W-S, I am not going to put him above Fulmer or maybe even Burdi, if Burdi can transition to a starter. Except he wasn't a top college pitcher this year. He was so awful he was demoted to the bullpen at one point.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 5, 2016 -> 09:20 AM) To be fair, they were in on Tanaka. And I know they have negotiated in bigger numbers, such as Alex Gordon.

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Aug 5, 2016 -> 12:15 AM) *IF* Pittsburgh claimed Melky off waivers, what would it take to get McCutcheon, who they may be open to trading given the pretty severe fall off he has had this season? Or maybe that indicates he was on the juice last season? He was a .300 hitter last year and he was just benched for 3 games by Hurdle. They are in need of hitting and Melky, I think, could help them. If McCutcheon got back to his old form, he'd look great in our outfield. McCutch wouldn't pass waivers, and I doubt Melky would.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 06:53 PM) He'll never have any value unless he can hit 30+ HR or hit .300+ because he has zero defensive value or stolen base potential. With over 1000 major league AB's, 95% chance he's a finished product at this point. KW with his stubbornness and massive ego is the only reason Avi is still here. This is so ridiculous because all of the evidence points to the exact opposite. Honestly I think Avi really hooked up Jobu with some good rum or something, because it is a miracle he is still on the roster. The Sox have spent forever trying to replace the guy, but he is still here because of a lot of things going right for him. Think about it. Sox sign Austin Jackson, Jackson gets hurt, out forever. Adam LaRoche retired Sox made run at signing Gordon, failed. Sox made run at signing Fowler, failed. Sox made run at signing Cespedes, failed Sox trade for and bring up Tilson, Tilson gets hurt in first game I mean that list totally screams stubborn...

This is a better view of the picture, vs the low pixel version on TWC's page. https://www.facebook.com/citybythelake.org/...e=3&theater

As a hobby, I do some photography. For the second year in a row, I entered a picture into The Weather Channel's It's Amazing Out There contest. The way that the voting works is that you click the link below. You will be taken to my picture on TWC's page. You will be required to log in with your facebook account, as the contest only allows one vote in 24 hours per facebook account. So far out of 1000's of pictures, I am sitting in around 40th place overall. If you are so inclined, please follow the link and give a vote per day. The contest runs until August 26th. If you are also so inclined please feel free to share the link below, or the link out of the TWC contest page to link directly to the picture for others to follow for voting purposes. Thanks in advance everyone! http://bit.ly/29vjEz6

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 01:44 PM) http://www.overthemonster.com/2016/8/3/123...trigger-on-sale Red Sox were unwilling to trade Moncada or Betts... That seems like a fan article with no real sourcing, but seemingly just repeating other reports on who Boston would deal.

Q GETS THE WIN!?!?!

Ugh, you can almost feel the rally coming.

QUOTE (The Gooch @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) He's old Farmer mentioned Hawk has a cold too.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 02:04 PM) That was not name-calling, that was accurately pointing out what you do damn near every time and did again in that very post. You're still not defending your claims that Trump and Clinton are equally bad and equally unqualified to be President, that there are just as good of reasons to jump ship from Hillary as there are to jump ship from Trump. And, again, that's exactly what normalizing Trump looks like--pretending that he isn't completely outside the bounds of what an acceptable Presidential candidate looks like, and that someone like Clinton is in any way comparable. I think W. Bush was an incompetent, terrible leader but I'd take him over Trump in a heartbeat. For someone who likes to rail against talking points/memes, that's all you've been tossing out here--you're blind, you're biased, you won't see it because you don't want to! without any actually argument. The US Presidential system does exist in a two-party world and always will given the structure of first-past-the-post voting and even more so the Electoral College. You need a majority of EV's to be President or the vote goes to the House, so the forces that compel people to choose one of two parties and for those parties to build broad electoral coalitions are essentially overwhelming. Short of reaching the point of the system being irreparably broken and armed insurrection being justified (or being in a non-contested state, thanks again EC!), voting for one of the two parties that actually has a chance of winning is the only really useful way to use your vote. Even then, even if you reject that analysis and reject strategic voting and want to vote 3rd party/abstain, that doesn't require you to continually try to draw equivalencies between the two parties or candidates. You can think that Clinton is awful and refuse to vote for her without performing the gold-medal-winning mental gymnastics required to convince yourself she anywhere near as unqualified as Trump. This is the end game. I'm done responding to you dropping out these turds of a post time after time and never backing anything you say up. Rest assured knowing that I'm done responding to you in the subforum through at least the election. This is the dumbest thing you might have ever posted. There is nothing about Trump that has anything to do with Hillary Clinton's fitness for President. Seeing Hillary Clinton as unfit for the office isn't "normalizing Trump". I have no idea what left winger taught you that new catch phrase, but it doesn't even make any sense. It is lazy two party politics as usual, at its finest. You can actually look at two separate things without them somehow depending on each other. As for the actual arguments, you ignored my point about their usefulness in this case. If actually I thought you cared an iota more than using the opportunity to praise and justify Hillary Clinton, I might have actually talked about it. Reading the years of posts you have made here there is no chance of there being an actual honest debate and thought process happening here, which means quite literally it would be a fools errand to do. I have a better chance of convincing the Jesus guy outside of Old Navy on State Street that God isn't real, than I do of having you believe that Hillary Clinton isn't fit for office. So no, I am not going to waste my time to set you up for your talking points so you can win the internet for Hillary.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) 11.22.63 on Hulu was good as well! This was a great mini-series.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 01:14 PM) You didn't explain your position, though. You threw out some trite phrases. I'm asking you to make an argument to defend those statements, but unsurprisingly, you're refusing and instead trying to deflect it back on me. As if it's my fault you can't explain to me or anyone else who's asked you how you actually support your conclusions. Trump and Clinton are not in any way, shape or form equivalent. You cannot simultaneously point to Republicans making principled stands to publicly declare they're voting for Clinton unlike those dirty Democrats who vote party line all the time* and then also indirectly completely disparage those principles by trying to claim Trump and Clinton are on the same level. Either you don't actually grasp just how awful Trump is in pretty much every way and why he's uniquely unqualified for office, or you have such a burning hatred of Clinton that you can't possibly evaluate her, warts and all, rationally. Clinton hasn't: threatened using nuclear weapons tactically; threatened to ban an entire religion from entering the country; threatened to deport over 10 million people and build a ridiculous wall; promised to start a global trade war; threatened to abandon our allies; implied that nuclear proliferation is a good thing; been totally and deeply clueless about foreign and domestic affairs; promised to simultaneously deeply cut taxes, greatly increase military spending, provide a massive infrastructure spending program and balance the budget; talked about forcing bond holders to take a haircut; said she wanted to beat up protesters or RNC speakers; been completely unable to let any slight, no matter how small, go and ranted for days publicly about them; promised to use our military as a global protection racket; retweeted literal neo-nazis and received the widespread endorsement of white supremacists; attacked the family of a dead soldier because they called out statements on Muslims; expressed a desire to "open up" libel laws to sue anyone who criticizes her; suggested that the sitting President was not born in this country; suggested that, if she loses, the system is obviously rigged. And that's just what I can get off of the top of my head. When you attempt to equate something like Hillary's use of an email server for at worst avoidance of FOIA requests (which is a s***ty thing to do!) with that garbage above, with giving a man as unstable and incoherent as Trump the keys to nuclear weapons and the largest military in the history of the world, that's normalizing Trump. *2000 election? Nope, never heard of it! The world isn't as black and white as you make it out to be. I can point to Republicans defecting to Clinton based on principles and still not agree with them going to Clinton, instead of doing something else. Those things are not mutually exclusive. I am not buying into the GWB line of thought that if you aren't for one, you have to be for the other one. The world does not exist in a Democratic or Republican version. It is a simplistic yet effective way of the parties trying to keep their troops in line without accepting that THEY might need to be the ones who need to change, instead of the voters accepting radically awful candidates. You can use all of the name-calling in lieu of actual independent thought and logic you want to try to bait me, if you like. I see no need to spend all day playing some silly game with you to somehow attempt justify that Hillary Clinton is a good Presidential candidate. What is the end game here? Do you really think if Hillary's list isn't as long, or as horrific, that somehow justifies her? That is going to somehow change my mind? That I am going to have this zen moment of realization? Please. Either you want see it or you don't. There will be no changing that. Just like arguing with people about how all of these things made Trump an unfit candidate, you will never see the light because you don't want to see it.

Zimmerman chased in the 2nd inning. Very nice to see.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 12:39 PM) Stop normalizing Trump and explain, in detail, why you think they are in any way equivalent. lol. Sure. If you aren't even reading two sentences explaining my position, you aren't going to read anything else that you don't want to believe. You can keep carrying Hillary's dirty laundry and excusing her for everything. I sure don't expect to see any change in that.

Abreu and Avi with yardwork! Very nice to see.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 12:16 PM) Spell out your reasoning of why Clinton and Trump are equivalent. Stop trying to normalize Trump. My problem isn't the normalization of Trump. It is the normalization of Clinton. Using Trump as an excuse and/or justification for Clinton isn't something I can accept.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2016 -> 12:18 PM) He's not a top of the order bat. A career .290 OBP guy. How can that be concluded right now? If you are coming to conclusions this quickly with inexperienced players, you are not going to have many high opinions of lots of players. I wonder what he would have thought about Greg Maddux his rookie year. "How much hope should we have" /= "concluded"

He does take 1B after getting HBP

Game has started, Anderson is already hurt.

Non-Sox, but impressive none the less. JJ Cooper ‏@jjcoop36 33m33 minutes ago Nevada OF T.J. Freidl's deal with the Reds should be official later today. $735K sets NDFA bonus record.