caulfield12

Delmonico's future at 3b isnt looking promising. What are his splits against lhp rhp to be platoon guy? Moncada bomb #9.

Moncada single, sb (15), rs Delmonico plugging along at about the same pace, single and RBI Kean Wong has to be related to Kolten?

LUIS Robert now 8/31, 2/4, double, walk...picking up the pace. Hard to choose which early game, so decided on Dunning, who's really going good again. Collins an at bat or two from slipping under an 800 ops. Kyle Schwarberish .214 average.

Mendick and Dickman, not pleased...

http://pro.boxoffice.com/weekend-forecast-...3-wonder-woman/ Transformers 5 expected to earn $73 million Wed - Sunday in US. Already at nearly $70 million from Thurs night through pre-sales coming into Saturday morning here in China. $91 million through Sat (2+ days). Will likely double US total for five days. https://www.yahoo.com/movies/transformers-l...-235315946.html Spoilers. Also, there's a non-Bay Bumblebee spinoff with Bumblebee coming next.

1057/3510 in milb, 386 walks 107/274 in MLB career, just 22 walks ISO 277 vs 179 (milb) .259, 36, 92 projected for full season of nearly 500 at bats

While the White Sox are known to be open for business, Heyman reports that there isn’t presently much of a market for Todd Frazier or Melky Cabrera. He hears that the Sox would “have to practically give [Frazier] away” or at eat virtually all of his salary in a trade. Frazier’s swinging a hot bat in June (.269/.351/.537, five homers), so perhaps he’s beginning to turn it around and boost that stock. Cabrera, meanwhile, is hitting quite well in 2017 after a slow start to the year, as he’s slashed .331/.386/.480 over the past calendar month. I’d imagine, however, that his $15MM salary and defensive shortcomings limit his market despite the improved production. Also of ChiSox note: Heyman writes that there’s no evidence of recent talks with the Nationals regarding David Robertson. Www.mlbtraderumors.com

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 09:50 AM) AFter this year I'm never counting out players that hit the ball really hard. Hell, look at Smoak. Hit the ball really hard for a while but numbers always sucked, now they are finally going out of stadium and into gaps. Or Morrison. Alonso, Thames and Judge.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 09:59 AM) Uh no. A league average defensive 3b with a 128 wRC+ is a 4 WAR player. That said, way too early to say Matt is that. But how likely is that scenario...? And how many GP at 3B are reflected in his current defensive WAR numbers already?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 08:08 AM) Same with Matt. Do we realize he is up to an .886 OPS now? As a DH, he's around a 2 war guy, but maybe 2.5-3.0 if he can play the position of 3b at around league average.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 07:37 AM) Where did you get these from? I know Melky's at -0.5 WAR, but I find it hard to believe he won't get better. I just extrapolated out their fWAR for what they would put up over 600 at bats...for example, Leury's just over 200, so he and Davidson have a lot more uncertainty baked in. For pitchers, basically 2.3 x their numbers (Pelfrey obviously won't keep it up), since we've played around 70-162. Not an exact science, but a nice instant snapshot. So no, I wasn't incorporating likely/possible improvement into the numbers of Cabrera and Anderson. Thought Leury would be lower, Davidson higher, Kahnle continues to be the most interesting decision on the roster after Q.

https://qz.com/994810/the-most-forward-thin...ct-same-things/ The Most Forward Thinking, Future Proof College in America That Teaches Every Student the Exact Same Curriculum

Transformers wasn't quite as bad as expected... https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2017/6/23...ense?yptr=yahoo By far the best part of the movie was any scene with Laura Haddock. She's quite feisty. Except you can be pretty sure no Cambridge prof wears 5" stiletto heels or shows so much cleavage. The biggest issue I have is sexualizing a 15-16 year old Peruvian actress, Isabela Moner.

Projected fWAR Q, 3.7 Kahnle, 2.5 Swarzak, 2.0 Robertson, 1.6 Pelfrey, 1.6 5.3 Avi 4.8 Leury 2.6 Abreu 2.5 Yolmer 2.0 Davidson 1.9 Frazier 0.9 Narvaez -0.4 Anderson -0.9 Saladino -1.0 Cabrera

Javier Baez? Jamier? They're not going to risk that move with Zobrist starting to decline. He gives them way too much flexibility, although sending Leury to the Cubs would help to somewhat mitigate that loss. I assume now you mean Candelario? http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0 23rd in fWAR now. 4.07/4.20 fip and xfip. Yankees' start next week is YUGE.

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jun 23, 2017 -> 06:49 AM) A lot of the smarter minds seem to understand the trade as part of a big picture (Joe Dumars gets the trade, for example). People who look JUST at the trade have bad grades, which is completely understandable, but the time was right for the Bulls to move on and they could not do that without moving Jimmy. Well, yeah....nobody, for example, thought Pods and Vizcaino was a fair return for CLee, but then you start taking into consideration payroll, defense/speed, player attitude, it's not always about the trade return itself. In that case, the corresponding reallocations of that huge salary off the books, as well as Maggs and Valentin. Of course, it's much more difficult for the Bulls to pull off the equivalent of the 2004-05 Sox offseason because of the limitations on star player movement.

https://sports.yahoo.com/2017-nba-draft-win...-005938774.html Pretty much the exact opposition reaction as to the Eaton trade, yikes...

The irony is that Hillary's states account for 63% of the nation's GDP. Trump lost the popular vote by three million as well, yet there's somehow a mandate to pass a bill that only about 25% even favor affecting 17% of the economy...meanwhile, this same bill is going to most hurt those in the 37% (remaining) of GDP states that voted for him.

The irony is that Hillary's states account for 63% of the nation's GDP. Trump lost the popular vote by three million as well, yet there's somehow a mandate to pass a bill that only about 25% even favor affecting 17% of the economy...meanwhile, this same bill is going to most hurt those in the 37% of GDP states that voted for him.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:39 PM) Think bigger picture man! Get away from those talking-point statistics for a minute. Just try. Just try to play devil's advocate with yourself. Maybe even google "why the ACA hurts poor people". I've never done it but I bet you'll find some interesting points. The poor are poorer because of the ACA, and it's going to get way worse if something isn't done. It basically said, you will forever be poor. Is that really better than some bulls*** health insurance that a majority of doctors (The good ones) don't even want to accept? "Hey Joe Poor, you can come be an apprentice and make a couple bucks more an hour, but you'll lose most of your health subsidies, so you'll actually make less money. Or you can stick with your under 30 hours a week because your boss only has 1000 part-timers now job. You pick. Meanwhile, vote Democrat and demand a $15 minimum wage so your small-business owner boss has to lay off more people, probably you, to compensate for his increased material and labor costs. And make sure you thank me for that $6 loaf of bread in 2020. But hey go see your Medicaid doctor for free for 5 minutes." -Obama There's scant economic evidence that minimum wage increases have led to anything but positive effects over time. Part time work at places like Wal-Mart has nothing to do with Dems (you didn't name a specific company in your example above). It's all about increased profitability and weakened labor unions. Pure capitalism reaps what it sews. Let me ask you this, has Wal-Mart been a net positive in Making America Great over the last 30-40 years? What happened to all the grocery stores, Five and Dimes/Ben Franklins, heck K Mart/Target/Sears/JC Penney, etc that a lot of Americans grew up with? Replaced by profits and increased economy of scale. Sooner rather than later, Amazon and Alibaba will complete the wipeout and there's nothing at all Trump can do to stop these gathering forces of globalization. Get with the program or be run over by progress. The shopping mall will cease to exist. Another final thing to consider is the conspicuous consumption of wants (rather than needs) starting in the 1980's along with the extension of easy credit/credit cards. Also not to be blamed on Dems. And Dems have put a lot more money into apprenticeship/training and vocational programs than Republicans over the years. Trump has a press conference/photo op about a $200 million apprenticeship program in order to distract from Russia and then it just disappears into the mists of time, never to be heard from again. I'll go one further. I can get anything delivered to me in a matter of minutes here in China. Everything is done by mobile phone/swipe payments, and cash is hardly used. The cost to deliver all these things?....the drivers make 14 cents per delivery. If they don't deliver on time, the first offense they pay a $150 fine, the second they lose their jobs. How many American are willing to work for $14 per hour, compared to $0.14 cents to work hard? http://relevantscience.blogspot.com/2017/0...na-thrives.html

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:12 PM) If you believe that poor people getting access to health care is a flaming pile of S*** then the ACA is exactly that. That has been the Republican Party Policy since 2008+. Yes, ~38% of people in this country will in fact get cancer. Yes, there are things we could do about that - like strengthening EPA regulations. However, cancer death rates continue going down, because we are expanding access to health care. We are about to kick tens of millions of poor people off Medicaid. More than were added by the ACA. If you think that people dying of cancer is a big pile of S***, then tell us a better way to do this. Otherwise, congratulations, a whole lot of people are going to die of cancer who we would have otherwise saved. But they aren't the important ones. It is that simple. http://crooksandliars.com/diane-sweet/sant...ack-people-i-sa The infamous "blah" people. African-Americans, the majority of Hispanics, Native Americans, Muslims, immigrants, LGBTQ, you're basically not wanted. The only demographic group to be grudgingly accepted is Asian-Americans because of higher education and higher per capita incomes. Look at the composition of the Trump cabinet. The AHCA signing in the Rose Garden. The 14 member health care working group in the Senate. It's The Handmaid's Tale all over again, just seemingly innocuous. And nobody in the administration seems at all concerned about all those voices being excluded. It might as well be Plymouth Rock or Jamestown in 1620 and 1608.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 08:32 PM) I'm not saying it's right. i'm just saying that the way they look at it. As far as other first world democracies are concerned, the USA has many unique variables that others don't. First off the population. Trying to fund healthcare for the large number of people compared to any other first world country is the primary problem. another is the tax structure. The USA pays less taxes than other countries, in general. You really can't compare the USA to any other country, just like states, countries are unique and what works well in one won't necessarily work in another. I would be in favor of a VAT tax such as the EU uses to fund any of these type of things. I just have a problem in principle of forcing the people who have more to give more just because they have more. Believe me as a college professor in Illinois. I'm not in the group that would have to pay more. What's VERY likely to happen is each state will come up with its own plan and just start worrying about their own benefits, essentially back to the Articles of Confederation model. For example, California, Oregon, Hawaii, Alaska, Washington, Colorado and maybe NM on the West Coast, NY, Massachusetts, Virginia and much of the Northeast will have better plans due to healthier populations with higher disposable income and more resources to work with (not to mention education and green energy environmental policies) ....leaving the entire middle of the country behind. Rust Belt states, those with big pension deficits (or foolish tax policies like Kansas), Texas (because of the illegal immigrant situation) and Florida/Arizona will be complicated due to retirees and immigration as well will be left out in the cold and start bleeding the best of those states to the coastal areas already listed. Survival of the fittest. One of the most ironic points of all is that many Trump voters in poor/rural states will be wiped out by drug addiction, cancer, obesity/heart attacks and a lack of proper nutrition. This will happen over the next 15-25 years, maybe faster at the present rate. If that doesn't get em, it will be lack of educational opportunities, robotics, AI, quantum computers, algorithms, virtual reality, genetics, etc.

Robert is ar least 2 1/2 or three years away. Personally, I'd try to find another "plus fielding" outfielder, a catcher and either a SS (insurance for Anderson) or power corner guy/1B/DH. All the guys we just brought in are 3-4 years away, other than Burger. Still too early to know what we have in Collins or Davidson. Pretty decent idea about Sanchez and Leury, on a contender those are two excellent and versatile bench players. Kahnle one of the biggest wild cards, for now, would probably hold him unless they're blown away with an offer. For now, Q, Robertson, Frazier and Cabrera are fairly well positioned to move. Pelfrey and Holland will go, but minimal returns, same with Swarzak.

Hawkins with 2 walks, no K's. Same line as Trey, both 0/1. 2 runs scored. Trey had a k, so not an exact match. Baseball.

The White Sox extended Mark Teahen, lol. He did have one FOUR month extended stretch of really good play his entire career. Of course, that was with another team. Avi never put up even 3 consecutive solid months of play. And he wasn't hitting any power at all in 2012 with the Tigers, just had a relatively high batting average for a rookie who basically came out of AA that year and had the "young Miggy" comps already. And did we ever talk about extending Beckham and Viciedo? If we followed the Anderson plan, that would have left the Sox eating two contracts. My personal preference is a 2 or at least 1 1/2 year track record of proven results.