caulfield12

But then there are the Trout, Kolek, Brady Aiken, Appel situations where scouts have a near universal consensus on a player at a given point in time and then the group consensus shifts with increasing minor league at bats or innings pitched. Obviously, injuries play a huge role, as well. It would be interesting to see how any scouts are still standing by their original views on Rutherford. And, as someone noted, there’s a long list of guys like Zunino, Chris Taylor, Marwin Gonzalez, Jose Ramirez or Turner who simply took an extra 2-3 years to find themselves, usually with 2nd or 3rd organizations. Fwiw, Tyler Flowers finally became a Top Ten catcher how many years after we traded for him? And the same can be argued to an extent about the Sox remaining patient with Avi Garcia, or even Leury, before he experienced all those health issues the second half.

QUOTE (turnin' two @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 12:13 PM) I know they didn't have great years, but I certainly wouldn't count out Buehrle, Contreras or Garcia coming up big in a one game shot. I always thought that team had enough offense to just carry Anderson's lack of production in CF to have his glove in the lineup. I seem to remember thinking Makowiak cost the team 3-4 games in CF (not his fault, he shouldn't have been in that position). http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/splits/_/id/5373/year/2006 Contreras wasn’t the same pitcher after the injury in late May that year. 5.40 ERA after the Break. Buehrle 6.44 after the ASB. Freddy Garcia at 4.12 would have been the best choice, probably. But his k-rate was already dipping precipitously. Jerks went through his own issues in the second half...so our lockdown bullpen disappeared as well (Politte/Cotts, etc.)

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 10:23 AM) That team was never more than 3 games under and that was at 1-4. Yes, they were 26 over at the ASB. Afterwards, they played under .500 ball, finishing just 18 over.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 10:51 AM) There was just a quinnipiac poll on general immigration. Something like 54% the same and then split the rest between increasing immigration and the white nationalist position. This was from Obama’s second term, but it’s impossible for me to believe the numbers have actually improved. New Rasmussen poll finds only 31 percent favor increasing immigration and that may be because only 18 percent of Americans think legal immigration is running higher than 500,000 per year. The real rate is more than a million per year. 58 percent of respondents either supported lower immigration levels or maintaining current levels. The poll found that 31percent of Americans support increasing the number of legal immigrants into the country if the United States can fully secure the border and prevent future illegal immigration. 29 percent say the United States should decrease legal immigration levels, and 29 percent would rather retain current legal immigration levels. Therefore, a total of 58 percent do not want to increase legal immigration levels. Another poll I found had e-verify as the most popular immigration reform, more popular than a pathway to citizenship.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 10:10 AM) It's not evenly split. Huge majorities want to protect dreamers. A majority wants immigration to stay the same, 1/4 wants to increase and a 1/4 wants to decrease. As far as losing Hispanic voters, why do you think Republicans are working at every level to delegitimize democratic institutions and outcomes? They get far fewer votes and still get solid majorities, and they suppress the vote on top of that. If you make it about specifically protecting those 690,000 Dreamers, either citizenship or residency, the numbers are in the 80’s. If you generically ask it, without any mention of Dreamers, DACA or illegals...about immigration, it’s much more opaque. It’s all in how you frame the survey question. Besides the fact we have about 98% in Congress approving stronger Russian sanctions with no accountability for the executive branch for intentionally defying the will of the people with nary an explanation. You’re just as likely to win an argument with a Tea Partier that fiscal conservatives don’t really exist because Reagan, Bush and Trump all cut taxes disproportionately to the advantage of the upper class while simultaneously blowing up Federal budgets...then used those deficits to justify “desperately needed” cuts to social programs. Meanwhile, Democratic presidents have run excellent economies (Clinton) or had to spend trillions (Obama) fixing the messes created before they assumed office.

How long until Allen signs with the Cavs?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 09:34 AM) There's no reason at all to reduce legal immigration. We shouldn't make the white nationalist position the starting point for discussions. If that’s the position, then nothing will happen until at least 2021. Because it’s pretty unlikely the Senate can tip blue with the House in November. Realistically, they will keep kicking the can down the road until they really need Democratic cover (over an infrastructure bill?) House Republicans don’t want an “amnesty” vote on their records before midterms. The country is pretty evenly split three ways...1/3rd want more immigration, 1/3rd want less and 1/3rd would like it to remain the same. In the long-term, the Republicans have to be aware of how many potential voters they’re alienating. They (Hispanics) weren’t motivated enough to vote last election because they didn’t have a clue how bad Trump would turn out to be...but they will vote in droves the next two election cycles, if the Democratic Party can prevent itself from tearing in half over the issue.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 09:16 AM) Or the current playoff format where they would have made the playoffs. That team was 8 games under .500 after the ASB and looking at the same odds as the 2008 team faced in TB after Quentin went down. What starting pitcher was going to win a wild card game at that point?

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/201...rts-daca-216954 Politico panel solves the immigration issue. Sort of. Basically, the Dreamers (690,000) would get a pathway to citizenship (number of years still not defined) in exchange for a 50% cutback in the Diversity Visa Lottery and 25,000 fewer family (chain/family reunification) visas for the next three years. Or simply the Dreamers for doing away completely with the Diversity Visa lottery program. Expanding the numbers to an amount between 1.3 to 1.8 million would bring the wall/border security of $25 billion into play, in addition to the visa cutbacks above. More than 1.8 million, visa cutbacks/the Wall/e-verify are all in play. Somehow, I have a feeling the House Republicans would never accept something that seems fairly reasonable. Fresco—described by Jawetz as “the consummate deal maker”—was intrigued by the Dreamer-for-diversity-visa trade. Fresco said he preferred trimming visa numbers for immigrants who might come in the future to stepping up enforcement to deport immigrants already here. “I always say I have no principles,” he said, “but I actually do have one, which is sort of minimize net pain, maximize net happiness in the universe. … And so, I do think the act of removing someone from the United States is such a pain-inducing act, as opposed to denying someone entry into the United States, which is pain-inducing but not as much. I do place a higher value on maintaining a person here than I do on a person’s entry.” .... Brown, who worked at the Department of Homeland Security under Republican and Democratic administrations, had a slightly different analysis of the wall. “I agree that it’s a boondoggle, it’s a waste of money, but I also know, having worked with DHS, they’re not going to build the great wall of Mexico,” she said. “They can’t, they won’t. President Trump will be long out of office even if he serves two terms before there is an actual wall. … All of the farmers and ranchers in Texas and New Mexico will be an eminent-domain hell for decades. … The reality is, it’s not happening, which is why it’s easy for me to say, OK, I will trade. Mr. Trump, you can have your 25 billion to try to build your wall in exchange for these Dreamers.” At the end of the session, however, none of the negotiators thought the real Congress would be anywhere near as successful as they were. Camarota, Fresco and Jawetz all agreed that Congress would most likely do nothing by March 5. The best they expected was that lawmakers would approve a short-term DACA extension to punt the issue down the road for at least another year. Brown, the optimist in the group, gave even odds between Congress doing nothing and punting for a year or so. “If I’m in Vegas,” Fresco said, “1-to-2 on nothing, 3-to-1 on a one-year punt, 75-to-1 on a deal, on an actual deal.” If they’re right, the Dreamers’ future in this country will be in limbo once again.

We’ve essentially added another $3 trillion to the deficit...giving the military far more than even they asked for (when they can’t even keep track of $500 million) despite having an economy that was finally humming along on its own without any government intervention. Not to mention the increased costs of issuing more and more debt/bonds in the future, due to overheating that wasn’t called for except in Trump’s imagination. Conservatives In Name Only.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 04:40 AM) Some people still haven't had enough of the veteran stop gap thing. Sheesh. Some things never change. And before you flame me, take a look at the bullpen before you say we are going to make a miraculous run this year. It's a transition year. Since the Shields trade blunder they have been making all the right decisions on acting on trades and not acting on other rumored trades/signings that would've been detrimental to the rebuild. Let's hope it stays that way. With the possible exception of selling low on Robertson/Kahnle/Frazier...

QUOTE (greg775 @ Feb 8, 2018 -> 08:44 PM) Note the difference in tone five years ago. This was a very polite post from somebody disagreeing with Greg. In five years we've gone to a more extreme tone in our responses many times. And why do you believe that’s the case?

Carlos Gonzalez, Eduardo Nunez, Jose Bautista (declining for last two years), Logan Morrison, Lucas Duda, Jarrod Dyson, Carlos Gomez and Cameron Maybin all still available at bargain prices.

Stuff like that makes you wonder if General Kelly is the one who is most mentally ill in the WH these days...his moral compass has completely become demagnetized. The only way for our GDP to continue growing at 2-3% is through “responsible/accountable” immigration standards. The only good that could come of a return to the 1950’s is significantly less Federal debt, which is something Trump has spent less time addressing in two years than Rand Paul has tonight.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 8, 2018 -> 09:15 AM) Kind of ridiculous considering the market to say you are buying high on moustakas. Maybe this is the most depressed market of decade. Before the offseason, he was projected at 5 years, $85 million. What’s a war number under 1 worth in this market, roughly the same as Todd Frazier’s deal?

QUOTE (MDWhiteSoxFan @ Feb 8, 2018 -> 06:24 AM) What about adding Moustakas? He's in his prime can play 3rd, then rotate Abreu, Davidson, Delmonico, and him at DH spot as well. On a one year deal? You’re buying high and he’s bound to decline in his 30’s. I suppose if you know Davidson and SANCHEZ aren’t part of the future...but it’s far from automatic he’ll be able to repeat last years’ numbers and fetch a good prospect at mid-season. http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/stats/_/id/.../mike-moustakas Plus he’s averaging just a 1.4-1.5 war over the last five years. http://amp.kansascity.com/sports/spt-colum...e198865874.html Twins, Cardinals (Gyorko had a good year, though), Yankees the only logical suitors for Moustakas

Holtman has to be COY. If not, Beard from Texas Tech...or St. John’s coach, lol.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 7, 2018 -> 07:28 PM) Or this is just a sexist smear that people keep falling back on. Name another administration that would have hired her for such an important position.

Is there anyone Hope Hicks WASN’T dating in the Trump campaign/administration? Somehow, she is going to end up the longest tenured staff member.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 6, 2018 -> 01:05 AM) The problem isn’t that you don’t know it’s that you think you know. You’re making up stats. There’s no basis or methodology to your claims. Doesn’t matter, your guy owns it now....Hannity’s “easy money theory” to the contrary. 24,000 mark is already a technical correction.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 5, 2018 -> 09:36 PM) We could, but why would we assign arbitrary percentages with no basis in reality to unrelated events that have no confirmatory value whatsoever? How about you tell us in your infinite wisdom why the stock market has crashed for three consecutive days in a row? Simply algorithms and profit taking, right?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 5, 2018 -> 05:52 PM) Earnings for Apple, Google, and Amazon missed a bit, and those three were some of the bigger drivers of the gains over the last year. Yellen and then the new fed chair both said they expect keep raising rates a bit, meaning the free/extremely-cheap money ride that we've been riding for years is going to slow down. The bond market is picking up a bit in response. Upward pressure on wages is also raising fears of inflation/driving up costs for companies, which will reduce stock values. The Nunes wet fart almost definitely has nothing to do with it. Fears of increasing instability of government funding and debt ceiling may play a part, though. Interestingly, Apple hasn’t been greatly punished in the last week despite nearly universal disappointment with IPhone sales (especially here in China), battery life issues, customers being manipulated into upgrading due to slowing operating systems, etc.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 5, 2018 -> 05:43 PM) I don't believe this has anything to do with anything you just said. The market has been on a roll because the economy has been improving for a number of years; a slight overshoot followed by a correction is normal. The Nunes Memo is not the primary driving force affecting the economy, and there's little evidence that the actual wage growth is being significantly driven by the tax cut yet as most of that is going into share buybacks. There's no surge in business investment from the December or January numbers available yet, just the same level of business investment seen over the past year. Just because other things are going on at the same time as the stock market doesn't mean the wild stock swings are caused by those other things. We can quibble over 40% or 50%. For the first time (under Trump), financing the debt (partially created by the tax cut) is being looked at negatively, or honestly. Talk of trillion dollar deficits again, and cutbacks of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. It’s fear...as is always the case. Psychology. Irrational exuberance, bubbles, bond yields, VIX, lofty PE ratios, rising wages triggered by tight job markets, a combination of all those things. If bond yields are nearing 3%, why risk the 4-6% return that comes with exponentially more risk in the stock market? And higher interest rates mean a drag on growth factors like business and capital loans, home mortgages/refinancing, car loans, student loans, etc. You can’t discount the tremendous discord/divide in our political system (worst since Watergate), nor can we underestimate the possibility of a real international crisis this administration is frankly not organized or proficient enough to cope with. The market is now expecting four 25 basis point rate hikes instead of just 3. And if Trump blocks the Democratic Memo and the House overrides him...God knows what will happen in the short term. He hasn’t even processed what to do with Gowdy’s “betrayal” yet. You can’t see the perceptions of complete chaos from an outsider’s perspective because you’re already in the system...but faith and confidence in the USA around the world is quickly eroding. That’s yet another factor. Add up everything, you have a long line of negative warning signals flashing yellow or red.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/gra...argeting-steele Apparently #2 Iowa-embarrassment and intellectual lightweight Chuck Grassley (behind Steve King) is going to move against Steele (of Dossier fame) tmrw with a “criminal referral”

Lol @ the position the GOP House will be when Trump blocks the memo and they have a vote of the full House late this week or early next week. House Intelligence Committee voted unanimously to release Democratic ten page memo. Btw, Democratic House candidates are blowing away most GOPers in “money on hand” as of late December. In some cases, 2-3 primary candidates have more than the Republican incumbent. Not to mention PA went from 13-5 to now opening up 4-6 additional races in PA alone due to gerrymandering decision to redraw.