iamshack

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 08:34 AM) If Boras were his agent, this would make absolute sense. The free agent market next year actually looks worse than this one for position players. Boras has a history of telling guys to take the one year deal if the market isn't what they thought it would be. It's a bit of a risk, but it's a wise choice. No need to sign the biggest contract of your career in a bad environment. I don't think Boras is the only one who is smart enough to give that advice.

QUOTE (woods of ypres @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 08:31 AM) Agreed. As I said in an earlier post, all the teams looking to compete already have second basemen or money contained. Cano is a free agent in the wrong market, at the wrong time. And that may very well be the case. I wouldn't be shocked to see 1/30 or 1/35 and have him try it again next season.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 07:58 AM) The only 2 FG attempts Robbie Gould has missed in Minnesota during his ENTIRE career, occurred yesterday, and one was a 66 yd attempt that was right on line. Looking back, kicking on 2nd down seems odd, but where is the guarantee they would have picked up yards. Didn't the Bears have 2nd and 1 late in regulation, where a first down would have probably iced it and they failed? I actually like Lovie a lot better than most. But I can't fault Trestman for kicking. I think most of us were shocked when it went wide. Yes, they had a 2 and 1 and a 3rd and 1, ran two times between the tackles, which the defense was expecting, and it didn't work. I guess what we're saying is that there are other plays that can be called which aren't necessarily risky plays, but aren't so vanilla that you can just throw 9 people in the box and shut them down, either. We as a team, and Forte in particular, are very good at running outside. We also have two huge receivers that are willing and able to go over the middle on quick slants, and also are good at preventing dbs from getting position on said slant plays, and are also good at batting balls down. Yes, he probably makes that kick 8 or 9 times out of 10, but this is the time he missed, and that's why you don't make that decision there.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 07:52 AM) I'd definitely do 5/125 for Cano I was thinking the same, but that isn't going to happen. Any good agent is going to recognize that you want to stretch the deal into the 6-9 year realm because that is when Cano's skills will likely be declining most. If you accept a 5 year deal, it's got to be compensating him a ton in those years...probably would have to be something more like 5/175 to get that deal done, and then you are just defeating the purpose from the Org's perspective.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 07:50 AM) If it were outside with some wind, I would agree with you. But in a dome, it was just a bad kick. I guess you could figure Gould's entire day and guess he had to be close to out of gas, but again, teams usually kick it on 3rd down when they have a fairly straight forward FG in OT to win, so really you were looking at the next play to pick up significant yardage and the call would probably have been conservative. Plus, the amount of penalties the Bears have been racking up comes into play. But they don't kick it on 2nd down. And we weren't in this position because of one long play. There was a sequence of plays where we were just running it down their throats. Why stop there? I agree, Gould makes that kick many more times than not, and if he just executes there, this is a footnote...but you have to know as a coach that if he does miss it there, you are the guy having to answer for these questionable decisions.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 07:40 AM) From 30-39 yards, Gould has made 90.5% of his career field goal tries. From 40-49 yards, Gould has made 72.2 % of his career field goal tries. That is a very significant difference and settling for such a long field goal on 2nd down was an awful decision. Ugh, that is worse than I would have guessed.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 06:24 AM) Throw a quick slant, run a bootleg so he can dump it out of bounds, anything. Robbie Gould is a fantastic kicker, but 47 yards is never a given. You shouldn't have so little confidence in your offense, especially when they've put up damn near 500 yards. I agree...the reason we have gone backwards in those situations in the past is because of the conservative nature of the calls in the past. We've tried to run between the tackles there and haven't been successful. However, call a play that isn't so vanilla but yet isn't quite a gimmick play. As you say, call a rollout for Josh, or run a flip 90, or any number of plays where you're not doing what the defense expects, but at the same time, there isn't a high degree of difficulty in executing the play. This goes to what Duke and Jake said previously. I don't have as much of a problem with the 4th and 1 decisions to go for it in the past, I just haven't really cared for the play calling in those situations. I still really like what Trestman is doing; I just hope he is taking some notes and learning this year.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 07:36 PM) That's just an awful excuse. Kicking a 47 yd fg on 2nd down is just a horrendous decision, no matter how you look at it. Let me put it this way...if we had fumbled or threw an int on 2nd down there, would people be second guessing Trestman saying he should have just kicked the fg on 2nd down? I highly doubt it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 06:58 PM) And he was the number one prospect. He's another Verlander right now. Gmab. I outline all that and that's the best you've got? Well to be honest, I don't have the energy to spend 30 minutes researching s*** so I can spar with you about an offhand comment on a message board. If you want to do that, it's your life. Phil Hughes at one point had some dynamic stuff; I know he's lost velocity at different points in his career, and seems to be a bit of a head case, but he's also capable of doing things Dylan Axelrod can only dream about. Has he put it all together over an extended period of time? Perhaps not. Is it wise to sign the guy for 3 years at 8 million? I doubt it. But at the same time, I'm not going to sit here with all the other White Sox homers and pile on the Twins without at least admitting this guy has some big time potential. I'll bet you figured Francisco Liriano was just another Dylan Axelrod after he left here too though...

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 06:35 PM) Pretty amped for tomorrow night's game. This city is buzzing. Seattle is nearly unstoppable at home. We'll see how Brees handles the ridiculously loud stadium and temps in the 30s at game time. I'm going into work early tomorrow to try and ensure I can get home in time to watch. Should be a good one.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 05:25 PM) They threw for 355 yards and have two incredible receivers. Run a quick drop and let one of them make a play if you are that concerned about the line. Or that.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 05:14 PM) The reason he did it is because our line is so bad. Being in FG range meant Minnesota could stack the box as we go into obvious run mode. We almost always lose yards in those situations. Passing was out of the question as well, mainly because of how bad our line was playing. When you wonder why our yards and our points never correlate, it's because we can't execute on big downs because our line always lets us down in those situations Run. Off. Tackle.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 04:19 PM) Hughes was great out of the bullpen in 2009, bad out of the rotation. 1.40 ERA in the bullpen, 5.45 ERA in 7 starts. In 2010 he put up an ERA of 3.65 in the first half. That's pretty far from incredible...and it's pretty much dominated by 6 good starts to open the season. From May 17 through the AS break he put up an ERA over 5. He went 8-2 in that stretch because Yankees. He had 6 stellar starts to open that year, put up a 1.38 ERA over that stretch, and then immediately went to being mediocre. Basically he did a "Gavin Floyd" that season - had an average year and then made his numbers look better thanks to a short streak of being incredible. He actually didn't last a full 7 innings once in the entire 2nd half that year. Whether or not he was the best prospect in baseball...Even his best season is only slightly better than iffy. I'd say that bringing up his prospect status after more than half a decade of not being a prospect is quite a bit worse of a joke than comparing him to Axelrod. You're right, Balta. He and Axelrod may as well be twin brothers.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 11:50 AM) I mean, lots of guys can string together "a bunch of good games in a row". Through his first 11 starts last year, Dylan Axelrod had a 3.73 ERA, .704 OPS against him, and .275 BABIP (so not obviously due to collapse bases on luck). When I look at Hughes's numbers, he was really good out of the bullpen in 2009 but aside from that he's been average in a couple years (2010, 2012) and pretty rotten in a couple years (2011, 2013). That's not "dominant at times" in my book, when he puts up an average season his total looks pretty good because he's had those Yankee offenses turning average performances into wins. In his best seasons he's a lot like "average gavin floyd". one big difference though is that aside from "torn up elbow last year" floyd has never put up full seasons anywhere near as bad as Hughes's down years. If they can get a couple of his good years out of him, they'll get good value out of his contract, and if somehow they have a pitching coach who can turn him around there's some upside there, but it looks to me like he's a guy who can fill space at the back of a rotation. He pitched great in 2009 and then the first half of 2010 he was incredible...I can't remember what ultimately derailed him, but it was much better than a bunch of good games in a row and much better than this Axelrod example. To compare him to Dylan is a joke to begin with. Hughes was the best prospect in baseball at one time.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 02:08 PM) As good of a job I thought he did in the first two months, he has been equally as bad the last month. Looking like a great offensive coordinator, but not head coach material. I don't quite agree, but I do hope he learns from some of these decisions.

You guys do have to admit that Hughes offers a high reward...he's been bad for awhile but he's also been dominant at times...

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 09:24 AM) What a great time to be in the market for a new smartphone. So many ridiculous deals this weekend. Sqwert, how often do you buy a new smartphone? It seems like you're ALWAYS in the market for a new smartphone.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 08:44 AM) Actually I think that is referring to the charity part. He was giving people rides in his car to raise money for a Phillipind Typhoon charity So was he the driver then, or was he the passenger?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 07:55 AM) FSU -30 against Duke. worst conference championship game ever? To be fair, FSU was -21 against a 7th ranked Miami team and covered it...and has done nothing but continue to dominate since then. This is more about FSU than it is about Duke.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 08:43 AM) Not just that, but by all appearances, that clause wasn't even in the original contract when these people bought their stuff. It was added later. Yeah, I saw that too... The fact that the headline says "legal experts sayit may be legal" cracked me up...not only do the courts frown on these types of contracts where the consumer has no choice but to accept the terms if he/she wished to make a purchase, but the courts also dismiss such vague, all-encompassing language. Seriously, you are prohibited from doing ANYTHING which may negatively impact the company? Nonsense.

I don't know who their "legal experts" are, but that is the most ridiculous clause I've ever seen in a sales contract and there isn't a chance in hell a judge would uphold that.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 29, 2013 -> 06:53 AM) Way too much gray area there. You could have defensive guys trying to make a play on a stumbling or falling player, knowing he's still gaining yardage. Plus, then he could fumble and there could be a pile up etc. Hockey has the same rule with goaltender masks. Yeah, but the rule is designed to stop the play from continuing. On a play where the helmet coming off is incidental to the end of the play, how does looking at the replay and calling it down where his helmet comes off furthering that goal? Instead, now we're lining them up in this dangerous position again and increasing the likelihood of further injury even more...and indeed, the next play, the center got injured.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 26, 2013 -> 08:08 AM) Did you mean LED in that last sentence? I thought screen glare was supposed to be worse with plasmas. Ahh, you are correct. I guess I forgot which was better in the light...and made the right choice after all.

I've got a 70 inch LED, a 55 inch plasma, and a 42 inch LED...I prefer the 55 inch plasma as far as picture quality. The 70 inch is beautiful, but our living room has a wall of glass facing the tv and so at certain times during the day, and at night when we have our outdoor lights on, there is definitely a bit of screen glare that I hate. We have automatic shades that we can lower that most address this, but it's still a pain. If the room is going to be getting any decent amount of natural light, I would go with plasma if I were you.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Nov 23, 2013 -> 05:10 PM) Can we trade for Gary Sanchez please? One would think they're hoping to plug him in when McCann is transitioning to more of a DH role.