caulfield12

You do you, Chicken Man!

What was the catch probability for that, around 55-60%? Btw, he can’t officially be a baller until he’s at least at the .150 mark or above…

That was the equivalent of Moncada running to first on that RBI groundout last night. At least the M’s announcers are still enthusiastic about the WC race.

Do they have enough pitching in the pipeline? Arguably, they'd be right there with Paxson this year, but the prospects mostly seem to be on the position player side. Such a surreal trade...players just going to opposite clubhouses, especially with the M's just having made a comeback from 7 runs down.

Well, the Sox signed JUST a five year (compared to many now for 10-20 years in duration) extension before the 2019 season, knowing they would be (or should be) in the heart of their competitive window after the 2022 season when it would come up yet again for renegotiations. So one can only assume their revenues weren’t going to go down any, and likely increased somewhere in the vicinity of 10-15% because of JR also controlling the Bulls, the White Sox were nearing the completion of their rebuild with most of the key pieces in place AND the fact that the Cubs were on the way out the door to start Marquee. https://sportsnaut.com/mlb-ratings-tv-viewership-numbers/ Here’s a very comprehensive and informative piece that talks about the overall picture, as well as reasons to be more upbeat and ongoing issues with the game, pace, Manfred, etc.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/lets-update-the-estimated-local-tv-revenue-for-mlb-teams/ White Sox 3rd in baseball, from before last season NBC Sports Chicago is owned by the NBC Sports Group unit of NBCUniversal (which owns 25%, and is itself owned by Comcast, the primary cable provider in the Chicago market), Chicago Bulls and White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf (who owns a 50% majority interest), and Chicago Blackhawks owner Rocky Wirtz (who owns 25%). Blackhawks should have done better this past season, as well.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2019/10/15/2019-mlb-regional-tv-ratings-in-prime-time-remain-solid/?sh=4fdb72f83f89 Of course, it should be noted that even that low 2’s score today would just put them ahead of a handful of teams. Dodgers, Rangers and Angels, for example, all from massive media markets like Chicago…Mets aren’t that much higher. So obviously those are also some of the bigger media rights deals in the sport. Ratings aren’t everything, but they are one lagging indicator of a team’s success or failure to put a competitive product on the field. You can see how far they still have to go to catch the Cubs, and also how bleak things were back in 2018.

That’s just RSN’s, though. Not counting MLB.TV, YoutubeTV, Hulu, Roku, etc., not even sure if it reflects numbers through Dish and DirecTV through MLB Extra Innings package. At any rate, they’re getting Top 6-8 t.v. revenues per broadcast, and that doesn’t even account for increased advertising prices that benefit a network that’s 50% Sox/Bulls owned.

I guess the shock the M’s aren’t adding and he (Graveman) is/was one of the best relievers on the market…

It's not WHO you play. It's WHEN you play 'em.

Mackowiak

The Royals are the best team in baseball since the ASB.

And very balanced results vs. lefties and righties…

Shocking news!!!! Frazier is leading off and playing LF, Pham was moved over to RF, with Myers to the bench and Hosmer starting at first. Wil Myers is going to earn $20 million in 2022 and $20 million if they pick up his option in 2023. And Myers even has an 885 ops this month. As to my earlier comment, if you read carefully, I wrote Hosmer and significant salary relief and/or top prospects for the likes of Gallo or Scherzer. Not Hosmer straight up. Geesh. To be specific, that means $20-25 million out of $59 remaining 4 years for Hosmer and trading one of Gore, Hassell, Weathers, CJ Abrams or Campusano. That gets you into a conversation with any team looking at a new 1B or needing a DH against RHP.

That’s the plan here in China…forcing 40% into vo tech schools to create the next generation of value-added/higher level manufacturing. The billionaire class is getting too powerful and threatening the government (societal inequality/housing and child raising costs, etc.), so the answer is to destroy or at least break up and highly regulate the tech industry, which was supposed to lead your economy into the future. It’s contradictory. The genie is out of the bottle. They just made another decision about after school and weekend training centers, to ban them because roughly 2/3rd’s of Chinese parents spend $1000-3000 per month for their kid/s from ages 6-18, just on supplemental or exam prep classes. Insane, right? Well, in the process…a black market of private tutors is popping up already, charging 2-3X…that only the richest can afford. Our school just announced the “test training center” for IELTS, TOEFL, SAT, ACT, etc., is now the Individualized Services Center, lol. Practical result, fewer and fewer will have 2-3 kids (until recently, could only have one due to population control) and China will end up essentially just like Japan from the late 1980’s until present day.

Then better just to cut them all $10,000 checks to continue to stimulate the economy and entrepreneurship. Almost every study in history shows that has a more pronounced impact than debt forgiveness or tax credits. But, inflation? Increasingly investments like Bitcoin? Housing prices through the roof? Can Americans actually be trusted to use that money wisely? Well, the argument on the right again goes it should never have been the government’s money…that individuals are better prepared to manage for their own future than Washington, D.C. (that line of thinking typically carries the day until 1987, 1997-2002, 2008-2009 or just last Covid year, when everyone cries for government to save or protect them.)

They’re risk takers/entrepreneurs/job creators! Trickle down or supply-side economics has worked so well in creating exponentially increasing societal inequality. We will see what happens here in China when the government attempts to re-level the playing field by force in the case of many of their tech leaders/billionaire class. The argument goes that they will in the process (stifling corporations and the Top 1-2%) destroy creativity, innovation and the individual will to work harder in order to get ahead…see John Galt/Ayn Rand for further reference.

People love government, but usually (only) when it benefits them. This issue is pretty polarizing…especially for Gen Xers who have mostly all paid off their debt through hard work, scholarships, grants, summer jobs, parental assistance, etc. Should those who went to state universities instead of Northwestern or Notre Dame be rewarded? Or saved money with two years of junior college because they were practical? To most on the right, this is just wrong, an unethical giveaway that punishes “risk taking” institutions that loan out money…especially in the case of public and private banks. On the other hand, it’s popular with a lot of younger people, obviously. Living costs have increased exponentially, health care, the cost of housing and tuition…it’s seemingly impossible for most Millennials to get ahead in life after 2008-09. So the problem is should this only be for those victimized by for profit or online schools? Everyone will scream they knew or should have known what they were getting into, right? This is where it’s a slippery slope. What is fair here, exactly? The right will scream about an ethical or moral issue, reparations, and argue “my” ancestors had nothing to do with slavery, maybe weren’t even Americans back then from 1608 to 1865. What about Native Americans, for example? Someone will mumble something about casinos…but I guarantee that same person has never spent a month observing life in Boone County, South Dakota, statistically the poorest in the US. What choices did African Americans or Native Americans have…unlike student loan borrowers? “We didn’t land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on us…” or so goes a quite famous movie line. I would actually prefer to give future generations free community college and/or a $10,000 bond (upon birth, for all Americans) that would accrue interest at 2-2.5% interest and couldn’t be drawn down at age 18 (or past it) for anything but higher education or vocational school costs. Because going backwards to some random/arbitrary cutoff point in the past is never going to be fair to those on the other side of that line.

Julio Rodriguez? They can’t afford to give up 7 years for 1 1/2 if every scout is right on their appraisal.

Who’s the sixth? Seager, Story, Correa, Baez and Semien…

There’s no hill. You guys have lost your minds if you think the best way to get someone off the books is to bench him. There are two choices. 1) Play him until he comes out of it again…looking for the most favorable match-ups. 2) Trade him…include Gore, Weathers, Hassell, Abrams (unlikely, as he’s out for the year), Morejon (same), Campusano, etc., to get it done. They had an opportunity to trade Wil Myers coming off last season and didn’t do it. If they can actually get a Scherzer or Gallo or whoever, and dump at least $20-25 of Hosmer’s $59 million remaining, they’ll probably do it…but it’s going to be for a big name that really shakes up the NL West. They also have Clevinger back next season, and who knows what’s going on with Lamet.

Good luck. They’re going to ask for Vaughn, Kopech and/or Crochet. He’s not even a player of need unless we’re dumping Madrigal at 50-75 cents on the dollar. Putting him at 2B just opens another huge hole in the lineup and/or future rotation. And the Sox are never going to pay $225-250 million to keep him after next season, anyway. Likely no team will put together an attractive enough package to entice Washington. This goes into the offseason or next trade deadline.

Way off again. He might be traded to free up payroll space, but he’s not going to the bench. The Padres, whose hunt for talent knows no positional bounds, could also pursue Scherzer, though the belief is they would only do so were they able to move money. For teams butting up against the $210 million luxury-tax threshold, he would cost a prorated portion of his $28.7 million tax number. San Diego has multiple options to shed money. The Padres have approached teams about dealing Eric Hosmer, who has four years and $59 million remaining on his deal after this season. He has a 10-team no-trade clause this year, and after the 2022 season, he would receive full no-trade protection as a player with 10 years in the major leagues and five with the same team, adding urgency to San Diego's desire to move him. Whether San Diego finds a match depends on its willingness to attach a top prospect. General manager A.J. Preller has long coveted Gallo, the 27-year-old slugger who

Way off again. He might be traded to free up payroll space, but he’s not going to the bench. The Padres, whose hunt for talent knows no positional bounds, could also pursue Scherzer, though the belief is they would only do so were they able to move money. For teams butting up against the $210 million luxury-tax threshold, he would cost a prorated portion of his $28.7 million tax number. San Diego has multiple options to shed money. The Padres have approached teams about dealing Eric Hosmer, who has four years and $59 million remaining on his deal after this season. He has a 10-team no-trade clause this year, and after the 2022 season, he would receive full no-trade protection as a player with 10 years in the major leagues and five with the same team, adding urgency to San Diego's desire to move him. Whether San Diego finds a match depends on its willingness to attach a top prospect. General manager A.J. Preller has long coveted Gallo, the 27-year-old slugger who looks increasingly likely to move before the deadline. A deal with Hosmer going to Texas and Gallo to San Diego is a possibility, though it almost certainly would necessitate the inclusion of shortstop C.J. Abrams or outfielder Robert Hassell, considered in the industry as the Padres' two best prospects. Pitcher MacKenzie Gore also could be in play in a deal for Gallo, Scherzer or another player as San Diego looks to gain ground on the first-place San Francisco Giants and second-place Los Angeles Dodgers in the cutthroat National League West. https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/31895818/mlb-trade-deadline-surprising-teams-go-all-new-names-watch-july-30-nears

Narvaez? Bassitt？Semien and Escobar.