caulfield12

Not to mention the WBC as well.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 08:57 PM) This is speculative. We could tax the s*** out of the rich and wipe out the majority of charitable donations that go to science and medicine and whatnot. Tax those absolute charitable bastards! String em up! Pay your fair share! Quit paying for most of our science and research! Give it to a social program that runs out of money after we get dependent on it! Quit employing people like me! Make the poor poorer! Just messin. I just love idealism vs realism. Isn't that classical GOP thinking? The foundations/churches/non-profit and private sector should take over from the government? That theoretically, the government shouldn't have to pay for any research, because the "free market" will figure out a way to develop it and deliver it to market in the most profitable and efficient way? (Of course, this doesn't work quite so well with "for-profit" prisons, the majority of charter schools or the development of the nuclear bomb.) But where is there evidence that giving the MAJORITY of the tax breaks to the Top 10-20% of wage earners and corporations results in any tangible benefits for the bottom 80%? Haven't we seen this tried over and over again since the 1980's? What has been the result, other than the accumulation of more wealth at the top and less at the bottom (see Thomas Picketty's book for tons of illustrations, looking at countries around the world, not just the US). At any rate, your theories will quickly be tested with the "replace" part of ObamaCare...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/don...iffs/index.html Lots like Trump and his new Commerce Secretary are committed to at least a "superficial" 5% import tariff (compared to the 35-45% proposals we heard during the campaign for Mexico and China). Unsurprisingly, the GOP isn't going to be quick to embrace these measures, although it seems he might make the argument he has executive powers to impose them rather than going through Congress. It's nearly impossible to be for "lower middle class workers" while also satisfying Wall Street simultaneously.

The problem with Q is the same one that Nats/Rizzo have with Eaton. As Sox fans and with most of us aware of even the simplest metrics like WAR, we all know the values of Eaton and Q, and can articulate arguments why Q might be worth the same or even more (rather than the 95% often-quoted) than Chris Sale. HOWEVER, if that Eaton trade blows up for the Nationals or any future trade for Q, the respective fanbases will be even more enraged because at least Chris Sale's a known quantity to nearly every baseball fan...the old, well, Dombrowski really rolled the dice and "went for it" line of thinking. When you're trading the same packages or potentially better ones for "non-star" players that aren't going to draw fans by name recognition alone, it's a dicier game for GM's. Another good example would be Shelby Miller, who was acquired partially because of "attachment/sentimental" reasons by LaRussa. When those trades go bad, they get you fired. With all that said, there will be a ton of GM's interested in Q still because they know his true value, contract, everything...and that doesn't mean we have to lower our trade expectations because of everything I just highlighted. But it's an additional factor to consider.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 08:34 PM) This is the first prospect list I have seen without the name Courtney Hawkins on it since when?? 2012? Yep, seemed we had to deal with Mitchell, K.Walker, Micah Johnson and Thompson hype for nearly half a decade.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 08:37 PM) I don't see that happening unless they dump Peralta's contract first. Peralta, Wong and Adams all (seemingly) have nowhere to go...IMO, it's actually quite amazing the Cardinals were as competitive as they were with the premature death of Oscar Taveras as well as the falloffs from Allen Craig, Holliday, Jay, etc.

The last thing the White Sox need to do is invest MORE dollars into Cabrera in his mid 30's (he would be 33 at the beginning of next year, and there's the unknown factor of his "real" body age due to the PED's). It feels like the only way would be if he lowered his salary demands for his next contract to the $5-7 million range, and you just don't often see players stay with the same organization when their pay is going to be cut by 50% or more...especially if they have a history of playing on winning or playoff teams. I suppose it's POSSIBLE the White Sox could want him back, but the odds are very high he's replaced by a better defensive LF, and do you really want Melky as your DH? On top of all that, but keeping the likes of Q/Cabrera/Frazier/Robertson/Jones around only makes it more likely we don't end up with a Top 5 draft pick. We're not going to compete with them, and they're all (other than Jones) relatively expensive players to carry on a payroll, so just not seeing the logic...unless we're going along with this far-fetched idea that Hahn's going to make a run at competing this year if everything goes right with the development of Moncada, Collins, Giolito, Lopez and Burdi. But then they're not rebuilding, exactly. Hopefully they get the package they want for Q sooner rather than later so this argument can be put to bed once and for all.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/figuring-out-...DlfMQRzZWMDc3I- Breaks down the market of all 30 teams quite nicely...even though it's targeted at EE specifically, you could easily substitute the names Abreu, Frazier and Melky Cabrera into the equation for many of the same teams.

Mark Cuban has been pushing for at least $100 billion of Trump's proposed infrastructure spending going into robotics, where we've clearly fallen behind Asia in terms of design and especially manufacturing.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 02:42 PM) Former Colorado U and Bears RB Rashaan Salaam, 42. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/sports/r...y-cte.html?_r=0 Really good read...

Is there any package out there with more potential upside (with TWO "co-headliners") than Torres and Rutherford? What would that package be? Dahl and Rodgers? Would Colorado even make that type of offer?

The problem is you're not going to get multiple Rodgers/Swansons/Sanchezes in any deal. That's where you have to calculate Rutherford vs. Mateo, or Mateo vs. Rutherford...or Judge vs. both. Do you want proximity to the major leagues/HR mashing potential or to find all-around ballplayers that will fit with Moncada/Anderson/Basabe (potentially) and can play nearly every position on the field from an athletic standpoint. At any rate, both of the deals for Sale and Eaton provided two potential headliners, so one would think that Hahn would follow this same formula in constructing a deal for Q, knowing the even higher bust rate (especially for A ball players compared to AA/AAA).

Isn't Holliday going to be their DH? 1B? He's going to play everyday in the OF? It's hard to imagine a legit contending team relying on the likes of Hicks and Judge in their line-up, but who knows? Also difficult to rationalize trading for Frazier and then leaving him parked in AAA all year unless they have such low confidence in the complementary players.

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/50-best-movies...-132637823.html Another Top 50 list with many of the same movies from the Entertainment Weekly Top 20. Moonlight, La La Land and Manchester by the Sea continue to receive the most attention. Brian, what's wrong with Passengers? I'm guessing it doesn't have anything to do with Jennifer Lawrence speaking out after the election? Bad early reviews? 99% Don't Think Twice 95% Tickled 86% Everybody Wants Some! Baseball-themed, cool music and Richard Linklater 98% Hunt for the Wilderpeople Sam Neill/Australian themed story 98% Embrace of the Serpent 93% Paterson (yet another Adam Driver movie, this one looks better) 90% The Witness 94% The Edge of Seventeen 96% Gleason (about former NFL player's battle with ALS, everyone absolutely loves this film) 90% Hidden Figures (coming out in January) 97% 13th (about the Amendment and prison system, promising director who did the MLK movie) 100% OJ: Made in America

Reagan will always have his treatment of the poor, Iran-Contra/Ollie North, Central America, AIDS/HIV, the crack epidemic/war on drugs...many issues the left will have with him. As far as Republicans presidents, you have Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt (who had quite an independent streak)...Reagan would probably be 3rd if you went back to the Civil War. Nixon did SOME good things before Watergate, but it's hard to overlook that and re-escalating Vietnam. Starting a dialogue with China was a positive.

But why would the Yankees trade Frazier when they need him in 2017? Also, if Benintendi was "untouchable," it's hard to imagine turning down him and Kopech for Q (and NOT getting him for Sale)...that doesn't make any sense, because that makes it seem as if the entire deal hinged on Basabe being included as the 3rd piece AND the choice between Benintendi vs. Moncada (ceiling/floor).

Because he was able to work together with Tip O'Neill. Bi-partisanship efforts, which contrast with polarization that picked up with Gingrich/Clinto and then continued to escalate under GW Bush. Surviving an assassination attempt added some gravitas...and "ending the Cold War" (although the GOP never wants to give credit to Obama for bin Laden.)

One of these trades, we need to bring some catching talent back...particularly on the defensive side. Perhaps Adams or Tate as the third piece instead of Judge...if you can get Torres and Rutherford and one final flier (ala Diaz), that's about the best we can do with NY. Whatever path they choose, they need to look reminiscent of the potential 2014/15 Cubs in 2019. Rutherford becomes the pivot for the whole deal, depending on scouting evals.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 20, 2016 -> 04:03 PM) Dayan Viciedo. Josh Fields and Hawkins/Barnum (to a lesser extent) would be more misses. The high profile one have to live with every day is Avi Garcia. Semien and Thompson, otoh, flashed potential last year...particularly Marcus. In a way, the high profiles failures with Dunn and LaRoche have caused most Sox fans to question their ability to identify any power hitters, but it's not like Frazier and Abreu are both chopped liver.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 20, 2016 -> 05:35 AM) We need to sign players we could flip. I'd love to watch Howard hit some bombs....and strike out 394 times but what the hell... On the other hand, you might get stuck with guys like Rasmus, Alvarez or Carter (at $6-10 million) and not be able to unload them (or that they will be exposed to zero lineup protection if we trade Abreu, Frazier and Cabrera)...a number of posters have argued that we overpaid for Holland, but at least he and Miggy and Shields can help mentor the younger pitching prospects. The obvious problem is that (for now) we don't have enough position prospects who merit MLB playing time in 2017.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 09:50 PM) Donald Trump's sons behind nonprofit selling access to president-elect https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/12/19/...president-elect Former Rangers/EPL owner Tom Hicks on that list. Well, Eric already was stopped trying to auction off Ivanka for a $78,000 coffee/tea meeting that was supposed to go to charity as well...definitely seems like Ivanka, Donald Jr./Jared Kushner are the "top three" in the pecking order while Eric's clearly fourth and a bit on the outside looking in.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 20, 2016 -> 12:01 AM) It's true that, of all the gaping holes to fill with a potential trade-chip veteran during a rebuild, a DH is the one that makes the least sense. But can't you make the argument that it's much more important (for a rebuilding team) to first find everyday infielders (3B/SS/2B), a catcher and a CFer, and that the corner outfield spots along with 1B and DH are the most "replaceable" and therefore it doesn't really matter unless you're blocking a top prospect from getting playing time who plays there? Because Lawrie or Garcia or Coats or Davidson putting up "decent" numbers at DH doesn't do much for you as a rebuilding team...unless they could play a defensive position as well in an above average way, because their offensive numbers alone at DH will never justify their holding down that spot. Nor would they be attractive to other teams in terms of a flip/trade unless they were reliable veteran pieces (think of a Pearce type) who teams would desire during the heat a pennant or stretch drive.

Moncada's 20 at-bats and the results of the AFL are getting way too much play here. Isn't that one of the largest reasons we ended up with Tyler Flowers? Another example, Adam Engel was the best hitter there (average-wise) and he's barely a Top 20 prospect with the Sox now...on the other hand, there's already so much hype around Torres, it's now or never to get a player like that before he repeats it at AA and gets called up at the end of the year. Of course, for any team holding such Top 30ish players, there's the equal danger he tanks like AJ Reed or Gallo and loses a lot of his luster in quick fashion.

The problem with that, GreenSox, is the likelihood of any of those Sox prospects (Liriano, Coats, Sanchez, Engel, May, Davidson, Avi Garcia if you want to lump him in still) making it are pretty much slim and none. So you've got the potential of a Saladino being a regular player...finding perhaps another 2-3 WAR bat if everything goes well. Counterbalanced against the need to have SOMEONE interesting for the fans to watch (that's the danger of trading Abreu, Cabrera and Frazier all before the season even begins)...the possible payoff in flipping them at the deadline for an even better prospect vs. whatever salary savings you can get (although the Sox already signed Holland, so they're not going for a $50 million payroll this year, obviously). Of course, they're also more limited in where they can spend that "found" money, for example, Latin America. But yeah, we can continue to make the argument that Semien (and possibly Thompson/Montas) would be key parts of the youth movement already if we hadn't tried to go for it prematurely. But it's the same issue with guys like Lawrie, Putnam, Petricka...the value of playing them and flipping them vs. the value of shedding payroll immediately and plugging in youngsters everywhere (in that case, they would have already parted ways with Lawrie and Avi Garcia). We MIGHT have a regular 2B/3B in Saladino, but the jury's still out. All those other players listed, we MIGHT MIGHT MIGHT get one regular, but it's just as likely we don't.

What is the Yankees' projected outfield and DH situation right nowv? Gardner, Ellsbury....?