caulfield12

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ May 8, 2016 -> 03:33 PM) I'm still not sold. He's looked so lost at times this year where it's hard to believe he looked that bad. He has no defensive value in the OF so unless he can hit .280+ with power he's really not going to be a useful player in the long run. Compared to the rest of our lineup he doesn't look terrible but we haven't had a solid DH in years. Dunn was absolutely abysmal in 2011, but his numbers from 2012-14 were more than decent compared to LaRoche last season. I wouldn't say we got "fair value" on his deal, overall...but 2011 just completely overshadows the rest of his Sox career. If we would have made the playoffs in 2012 and Dunn hadn't been part of a team-wide slump down the stretch, there would be more appreciation for what he actually did contribute.

Votto was the one they were building their future around, like Freeman in ATL to some extent. Bruce and Phillips and maybe Homer Bailey (as soon as he returns and re-establishes value) are the three main trade priorities... I can't imagine they're willing to give him up for the likes of Adams (based on how he's pitching now), that would be a huge psychological blow to the fanbase after losing their favorite in Frazier. You know the Rockies wouldn't accept that offer for CarGo...and Colorado is in a better financial position than Cincy at the moment from all indications. Adding Bailey with 25-33% financial subsidy from the Reds to cover the risk after TJ (he's just resumed throwing but not off a mound, and had some ulnar nerve irritation, so a slight setback) would be an interesting move that wouldn't cost us significant talent from the minors but would potentially shore up the rotation. http://espn.go.com/blog/mlb/rumors/post/_/...p-in-cincinnati

http://www.startribune.com/postgame-twins-...-sox/378587876/

QUOTE (Brian @ May 8, 2016 -> 07:12 PM) This looked intriguing until the overly CGI shark. Hope that is just rough effects. Was hoping they'd do it the Speilberg way and barely show it. Sharknado 4? Any movies besides "Eye in the Sky" worth checking out over the last 2-3 months?

Not unlike when Barry Bonds was in his heyday with the Giants...hardly getting any pitches to hit. Not so great for the fans, but sound strategy at the moment.

That Manny Ramirez acquisition is still a head-scratcher nearly six years later. KW always seems to pursue the "name" veterans. As GreenSox is obviously pointing out that overpaying for CarGo would be a mistake, I guess all we can say at this moment is that it "depends on circumstances": 1) Tim Anderson's development or lack thereof 2) The rest of the division's positioning in the standings 3) How much not having a big lefty threat (other than Melky as a switch hitter) is hurting the line-up

Let's hope Chris doesn't have a shattered skull someday pounding himself on the head with the ball...we already sabotaged one season with Quentin taking his anger out on himself and his bat.

Free agent signings are one thing, but when you start talking about trading Rodon or Quintana, Eaton, Fulmer and Anderson, then you're shooting yourself in the foot too much because we don't have the minor league depth remaining to cover for all the loss in talent. A-Rod meant a loss draft pick, and actually saving money they would have had to spend on that selection. With Miggy Cabrera at the time, it had little with the Sox payroll and everything to do with the fact that Miller and Maybin were both Top 35ish milb prospects AND the secondary fact that Detroit was willing to take back Dontrelle Willis' contract as well. We just didn't have a projected starter or outfielder who had the upside both those prospects did at that point in time. We could afford Trout, but then you're talking 1/4th of your payroll at $33 million going to ONE player...start factoring in Sale, Abreu, Robertson, etc., and all of a sudden you're having problems keeping the payroll below $140-150 million in order to be competitive...otherwise, you're just like the White Sox the last two years with Abreu/Sale or the Angels with Trout. Out of the playoffs, no matter what numbers he puts up.

In the end, Hahn picked Anderson's potential over Semien. Time will tell if that was the right call or not. It could be worse. Was just reading an article at the Star Tribune (Minny paper) and it looked all all the Twins' long-term contracts, going back to Puckett and Hrbek. Almost all of them blew up in their faces, not unlike Danks for us. The list includes Mauer, Morneau, Phil Hughes, Nolasco, Santana (he's been "okay" so far, and Hughes was very good on a one year deal, terrible since the extension), Chuck Knoblauch and Glen Perkins. So, in the end, this strategy (and maybe there's no choice financially) of bringing in guys with 1 or 2 year deals seems to be working quite well. Even Melky's been revitalized this season when he looked like a dead contract three months last year.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 7, 2016 -> 06:04 PM) Nepotism is bad! As seen by my example of one of Americas greatest secretary's of state becoming president, and going on to become one of the leaders of the abolitionist movement. Great argument. Well, in all fairness, JQ Adam wasn't a very good president...he was much more effective as secretary of state under Monroe. To most Americans now, he's more famous due to the Amistad movie by Spielberg. At any rate, generally people no longer feel there should be "dynasties" (see reception to Jeb Bush this election season) and most in the Democratic Party would prefer Liz Warren to Hilary as president, but it is what it is at this point...it's no longer about electing a woman or supporting the Clintons as it is about defeating Trumpism. If she were eligible (and I think she's 34 still), I would much prefer Ivanka to Donald Trump, fwiw. Now that would be interesting! And Greg's pushing the idea of Chelsea Clinton running some day isn't that far fetched. Unfortunately for her, she's more like her mother in terms of likability than her father. Of course, you have the Kennedys on the other side of the spectrum. The one who everyone expected to be president when they were all young died in World War II...meanwhile, John, Robert F. Kennedy (might have had two presidents if not for June, 1968) and eventually Ted/Edward (most prolific and successful Senate legislator in the last 50 years) go against that argument. Of course, if you're a Republican, you absolutely hated the Kennedys and everything they represent.

Seemingly the biggest problem for the Cubs this year is going to be keeping up their competitive "edge" in the last 6-8 weeks of the season...if they win the division by TOO MUCH, and start resting some of their regulars along with Lester/Arrieta, there's going to be the danger they're vulnerable to a team that survived the tempest of the playoff race and probably a win or go home wild card match-up. Not easy just to "turn it back on" after not being in competitive mode for so long...the Cubs learned that last playoff season with the long layoff before NLCS.

A multipurpose stadium for two teams? Really? That close to Soldier Field? I can buy the new stadium (where is the funding going to come from if it's only related to MLB/Sox, though?) idea, perhaps...but how many stadiums today work well for both baseball and football equally? It would have to be one of the most expensive and modern stadiums in history to pull off that feat, and would undoubtedly also involve a retractable dome/roof idea to protect against the weather. Hard to imagine another NFL team in the same market, and literally down the street from the Bears.

17:$19.25M, 18:$33.25M, 19:$33.25M, 20:$33.25M full no-trade protection Where are we going to get the money or the trade chips for fixing/repairing our rotation...? You're going to have to trade 2 out of Rodon/Quintana/Fulmer and maybe Adams. That leaves only two certainties in the rotation...and three more question marks with no or limited internal options. From 2018-2020, the financial flexibility we've been waiting for with Danks/LaRoche leaving would be essentially erased by a $100 million contract over 3 years.

In June, 2008...we were up by six games for two days.

The game was still quite close in the top of the 7th, Sale had been cruising ever since the 1st (although he had to throw quite a few pitches to get Sano there if I remember correctly) and Minnesota had the weaker part of their batting order coming at the time...I remember being a bit surprised, because he threw 112 the previous game and struggled a bit, but you can also understand wanting to keep a close game (and the 7-0 record) in Sale's hands as long as possible. We've seen too many 1-2 run Sale/Quintana leads disappear in the 7th or 8th innings over the last 3+ seasons to not understand RV's move there. As Frazier said, now's the time to pick up some separation from the rest of the division while CLE/KC are beating up on each other and the Rangers' bats are feasting on Tiger pitching. At any rate, for a game where we were absolutely abysmal with RISP (Saladino had a single but no RBI) until later in the game when we started piling on a bit, it was nice to get a comfortable win there at the end. In years past, we don't score there (against the bullpen with bases loaded, one out and Abreu up) and we turn around and give back the lead with bad defense the next half inning. 5-0 against the Twins, 6-1 overall against ALCD. 20-1 in Sale/Quintana/Latos/Gonzalez starts.

Therein lies the rub. The White Sox have a tremendously profitable stadium lease arrangement right now, even without drawing in excess of 2,000,000 per season (not to mention control of all the parking revenues). The odds of the public financing climate changing in the state of Illinois, will all its attendant economic and tax problems...and, in light of how close they were to losing the team in the 1980's, you'd have to imagine nobody would step in to rescue them this time. So it amounts to an owner or another market making an even more attractive offer than the guaranteed profits from remaining in Chicago for the next 15 years or so. It's more likely around that time that baseball would be looking to expand internationally...or they'd come up with some type of agreement to play XX number of games per season in Mexico, Havana, Brazil, etc. Las Vegas, for the reasons you mentioned...indoor baseball, the fact that gambling is very macroeconomic-influenced (booms and busts, just like housing), and that it's hard to imagine picking up enough season ticket holders with the transitory nature of seasonal residents, just not seeing it. If you look at population and economic trends, San Antonio or Austin, Montreal, California, Charlotte, perhaps Portland (have a feeling both Portland and Vancouver are too close to Seattle, territorial rights)...it all just depends on the type of legacy the Reinsdorf family wants to leave in Chicago. It's likely that JR would try to influence his children to eventually sell to someone who would keep the team in the Chicago area, somehow.

GreenSox will enjoy this stat... Marcus Semien now with 8 homers and 15 RBI's, 9th in qualified SS OPS and tied for 10th with Russell/Baez, Villar, Asdrubal Cabrera and Elvis Andrus at 0.5 WAR. Aledmys Diaz of STL already at 1.9.

White Sox are 102-75 if you skip the last 15 games of 2012 and completely dismiss 2013-2015, lol...

28,000+ 19,328 per game average... Now 27th in the majors again (passed OAK)...and currently only trailing the surprising Orioles by about 1,200 per game. Should catch Miami, Cincinnati and Minnesota at some point in May or June. One has a feeling Philly and ATL will slide back, too. Interestingly, the Nationals are "only" 20th in attendance at 26,144 per game...seems weird that the Orioles and Nats are both among the best teams in their divisions in the early going and both struggling in that same geographic market. Weather? Hard to figure, with arguably the best or 2nd best player in the game in Harper. KC 9th, Detroit 13th, Minnesota 23rd, Cleveland 30th (and almost 2,000 lower per game than TB).

Well, that's one way to get Park out of the game. Of course, Mauer is their best hitter again this year, but doesn't particularly enjoy facing Sale lefty lefty. Need more productive outs there from #2 hitter. Sure Jackson will be seeing better pitches to hit, but his strikeout rate is just too high for that spot in the order.

Santana still has some life on his fastball...95 MPH. Main reason the Angels gave up on him...they felt the quality of his stuff was degrading.

Well, 2-0 isn't that bad...with Suzuki batting, you almost expected a bases-clearing double and a 5-0 lead and an early end to your Saturday night's entertainment. So much for Bill Melton's advice. You start to wonder if those hit by pitches were a carryover from the game late last night...Park was probably intentional, right?

Well, this start isn't boding well. Reminds me of that time Buehrle totally got destroyed by the Twins in the 1st and the team rallied back later...hopefully no grand salami here. 32 pitches.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ May 7, 2016 -> 04:46 PM) Yes. It is weird. But you don't like the way Hillary speaks. And you think she's "mean" (without, of course, the same scrutiny for the way Trump treats others). So I have a feeling that your position on the Clintons has zero to do with substance and everything to do with "judging a book by its cover." And we can use that argument too with George W. Bush never having become president without riding on the coattails and connections of the father...even though he ran away from him as president in big decisions. Of course, Greg's argument would be that nepotism is bad in general...Adams/John Quincy Adams, etc.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 7, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) It's not devaluing the currency, it's about defaulting on the bonds to "get a better deal." I saw a full story today. Apparently, he wants to negotiate a better rate on the bonds (giving investors a "haircut" as they say)...haven't seen a single economist who agrees with this tactic. His argument for doing so relates to how he did the same thing with creditors during his four previous bankruptcy filings...well, because the biggest economy in the world works exactly like his companies, at least in his mind. Certainly, it would push up interest rates on debt to much higher rates than 1.5-2.0% That's obvious.