iamshack

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Apr 4, 2017 -> 06:57 PM) Tesla just overtook Ford and GM for the most valuable car company in the US. Didn't even notice their stock is up over $300 a share now. Told my dad to buy 4 years ago or so when it was around $110. I took a small position just like 3 weeks ago at $250

Accepted a new job recently. Official start date is the 17th of April. Same company. Exciting new role, so I am pleased. Was given the option to relocate to Reno, NV if desired. Intrigued by the thought. Reno is turning into a little tech hotbed...definitely on the upswing.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Apr 1, 2017 -> 12:05 PM) http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0331-story.html This is excellent. The stuff with KW is great Yes it was...shows how silly the perception about KW is, to be honest.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 25, 2017 -> 08:12 AM) And this is the exact downside to "blow it up". If it fails, we are talking years more of problems. These posts are frustrating coming from you, because I think you know better.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 03:10 PM) I don't only because today did not do anything to improve Q's value. Everyone knows he is a terrific starter locked in at an extremely affordable rate for the next four years. Dominating a (bad Reds) team in Spring Training does not really move the needle in terms of Q's talent/affordability. What will move that needle is another team's desperation: major injury or bad performance by another team's starter. I don't foresee that happening until May at the earliest. Yeah, I get it...but it's like when teams were scouting Chris Sale. You ask yourself, for what? What more is there to see here? Where I disagree with you, however, though, is that this performance didn't increase Q's value. It doesn't matter the competition when you are that dominant. Pretty certain scouts came away today saying "this dude is the real deal."

Anyone think the game of chicken ends after today and something gets done?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 23, 2017 -> 09:46 AM) I mean this is how the rebuild looks so far. 1. Get tons of pitching potential 2. Get a couple of offensive players 3? 4. Playoffs. Bastardizing an old GM quote.. the pieces are not in place, yet. Sure we can still trade for guys in the future, but that only pushes the timeline out further, just like I said. Even if we end up with the #1 pick in the 2017 and 2018 drafts, when do you think those guys will be ready to play? When do you think they will be contributors? Even if the draft class we just had turns out great, when will they be ready? This franchise just has way too many holes today for this to happen quickly. Sure the holes can be filled, but not instantly. For the same reasons you are saying we can't know when we will be competitive, it can come together more quickly than we anticipate. WAY too many moving parts to know to any degree of certainty what the future holds.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Mar 22, 2017 -> 05:20 PM) Whose turn is it to say they feel like something may happen soon? Usually ChiSoxFanMike?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 22, 2017 -> 02:05 PM) They may even realize that by May. And the good news is I fully expect the Sox to be willing to make a move early if someone meets their price. I think once the season gets underway, you may as well see what the deadline brings. Screw these teams for trying to play it cute.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 22, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) Wasn't that the Pirates' GM or am I wrong? Yeah, I just realized that. My bad.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 22, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) You can have a couple of pieces in place, but not the rest. The possibility exists that much like the Red Sox deal, the top pieces fell into place, but it was the third player and beyond the teams had debate on. Remember the White Sox wanted Devers, but Boston wasn't willing. Moncada and Kopech were already in place. If those two pieces are in place, after all this time, it's close. Makes you wonder about Luhnow's latest comment in re "the ask..."

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Mar 21, 2017 -> 06:49 PM) Sources: It's status quo with Jose Quintana for now, but he could be moved by the White Sox at any time. The latest: https://t.co/xE6BUB1iiV https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/844362919559249921 I like that.

QUOTE (Tony @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 04:33 PM) Was there ever a rumor about the Sox trying to lock up Beckham during his 1st year? Maybe the Sox didn't feel as confident in the progression of Beckham like they do in Anderson.. I don't remember...I remember suggesting it as I compared what the Rays did with Longoria though

BTW, this makes me think Hahn is just bored.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) If their internal metrics (including the StatCast data) say that his defense is here to stay, then lock him up. If he's a +10 run defender (above average) at SS he could hit 260/290/410 and still be a 3 WAR player. Yeah, I'll agree with this. I don't particularly love him as a player...and I agree with BP in saying that Beckham looked the part in re: the eye test, but if the defense suggests he's worth it, it isn't a bad gamble.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 19, 2017 -> 05:43 PM) Frazier you trade for pretty much anything you can get. He has zero trade value. Same with Abreu. Just wait. You'll be proven wrong.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) Well, depth is definitely not overrated, but I know what you mean. All the same, impact prospects can come from all over your rankings, just as impact prospects can bust. FanGraphs 2014 top 100 There are quite a few in the top 20 that either flamed out or didn't/haven't lived up to expectations thus far. Obviously Oscar Taveras is a terribly sad and largely very rare case, but these are still humans we're dealing with too, they are not invincible. Meanwhile, Franco, Corey Seager, Odor, Bradley Jr, Castellanos, Dahl, Frazier, Meadows, Crawford, Stroman, Peterson, Betts, and others (plenty of them can have cases made for them) exist beyond the top 20 to 25. If you get 4 prospects that are currently viewed as 50-60 FV, that can have just as much of an impact as 1 player who is viewed as a 65 FV player. How many of those players came from the same system,Wite? That doesn't mean you trade an asset like Q for depth. You trade Frazier, Robertson, Jones, Abreu even for depth packages. Not Q.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 09:40 AM) I would have no problem at all with a deal that gives us a boat load of B level guys. Our system kind of goes from A to C guys now anyway. Filling in the middle would be great for depth. Depth is overrated. Look at how quickly our farm system has jumped in the rankings based on two trades. We need impact players from a trade of Q.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) The brand may not be important but I switched my dog to senior food when she was about 8 and it really helped her energy and joint pain. I use Orijen Me too! Great food!

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 07:43 AM) TV markets do change as a part of a relocation like that, however the relocation would probably meet heavy resistance from all the markets I listed AND the markets in the AL Central. You're talking about up to 10 owners being anti-move for the White Sox. This isn't directed at iamshack (he asked a fair question), but I hate these discussions. The White Sox aren't going anywhere for a long time. They're not even close to the top candidate for relocation. I agree with you; but interestingly, a Vegas has been suggested as a landing spot for the White Sox more than once now. One point about the Nationals, A's, etc, it is one thing to fight over a major metropolitan market like Baltimore/DC or San Fran/Oakland, it's quite another for teams hundreds of miles away to make a claim for a market. I suspect sorting out a Vegas TV market would be much more clear than some of the other examples offered.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 07:33 AM) Nothing screams baseball like 110 degree days in the desert. Dome or not, summer is also the worst time of year for tourism there because of that weather. This is probably the biggest obstacle, although it's not as quiet here in the summer as you'd think.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Mar 12, 2017 -> 08:27 PM) Plus Vegas and Nevada in general are a highly transient locations. I don't know many people that abandon their childhood allegiances if they move to a different state to start rooting for a hometown team. At least I wouldn't. I wouldn't, but there is a much larger population of "natives" that are born and bred here. It's not the same as it was in 1995.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 12, 2017 -> 08:32 PM) You completely missed his point. He's saying a Las Vegas team won't be able to get a regional TV deal that covers Northern AZ, UT, ID, OR, & Inland CA because those areas are already part of other teams' existing territories. The fact you are blacked out of six different teams' markets only supports his point and shows how little value broadcast rights would be for a MLB team in Las Vegas. You are suggesting the TV rights wouldn't change if there was an actual team in Las Vegas? Vegas gets claimed by other markets because there is no team here. I'm not sure how one can appropriately value a Vegas baseball television market without the presence of an actual team? Nor would I suspect that the fact that other teams claim it as a market shows any pertinent information on value to that effect.

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Mar 12, 2017 -> 06:38 PM) Spoken like someone who doesn't know how TV markets work. The Diamondbacks, Rockies, Mariners, and California based teams will not cede their markets to Las Vegas. You can prove to me Las Vegas is a TV market, but Chicago is still a much better market. Actually, I'm blacked out from a lot of those markets. But you know everything, so...

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 12, 2017 -> 05:48 PM) I doubt tourists go. Way more to do in Vegas. Trust me, tourists use all kinds of things as excuses to come here, and then plan around those things. The question is more about is there enough population to support 81 games @30k? Not sure about that.