caulfield12

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 03:16 PM) Why would someone engaged enough to partake in a caucus for Sanders ever vote for one of those three? What's the ideological overlap there? Kasich isn't very far off from her classical triangulating moderate/centrism. Better personality. Bloomberg is fiscally conservative but socially liberal...he won't get as many from Sanders, although polls stiil how him splitting off 5-7% in a three way race from Bernie. Rubio is just much younger, attractive, hopeful/optimistic and reminiscent of Obama to many. See his speech at Timberland and you'll understand why young voters would be drawn to him.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 03:19 PM) You know...I don't really get it. A lot of what Greg has said is actually true. Have you guys watched a lot of the clips. Most of the time I watch any coverage on the election, I just roll my eyes at the absurd arguments made on both sides of the court. You all do realize the vast majority of people who vote know nothing other than some slight aspects from what the media says and more often are going to go and vote based upon party and likeability. For example, someone just not liking someone because of there look is a total normal reason to not vote for someone or how they carry themselves. History has shown how superficial voters are and yet all of you want to ignore those facts. I have talked to numerous people who like trump purely because they here the media say he tells it like it is. None of them know what he actually is saying, he just "tells it like it is". Thats it. You all give people too much damn credit to be frank. And maybe someone will whine and say, well now we are smarter, no we aren't, Howard Dean's speach ended his campaign (did he have other issues, sure, but that one speech sure has hell torpedoed any remaining odds he had and it isn't like he said anything bad). Plus lets be realists, I could make an argument that Trump (and I think by now, all of you know I don't like Trump) is the most selfless of everyone in this campaign as he's the only one who hasn't been totally bought out (of course I'd also tell you he has a gargantuan ego and that is probably more to do with him running). They are all selfish candidates who have all kind of interests with gigantic egos. Anyone thinks otherwise is delusional. The potential exception to this is Sanders, who genuinely seems passionate about what he wants to do (and I'll give him credit for that) and is an extremely rare candidate from that regard. Kasich strikes you as selfish?

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/9/23/9...ctive-mat-latos Some very good info here. Pay particular attention to the last four paragraphs.

Greg, how many of those 84% of women under age 30 supporting Sanders in Iowa 1) will still vote in the general election and 2) wouldn't vote for Kasich, Rubio, Bloomberg instead? As things stand now, she probably loses half one way or the other. Plus, her husband, Madeline Albright and Gloria Steinem are polarizing things in a panic just like eight years ago in South Carolina. She's quite fortunate African-Americans can forgive their family after insulting/smearing Obama so openly.

And Dodgers fans in general are a bit more passive than Cubs' faithful...not to mention so many things to do year-round out there compared to the 2-3 month window of reaally nice weather in Chicago.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) Aaaand he's a Twins fan. One of many teams like the Orioles that could use the starting pitching. Fwiw, a lot of KC fans wanted him over Kennedy but Dayton Moore supposedly nixed it over the character issues and familiarity Dave "Fantasy" Eisland already had from time in NY.

Just to get it on the record, does this move seem more Hahn or KW? Didn't Williams covet Latos at one point or another (in all fairness, everyone did about three years ago)?

Sometimes, there is a conflict between a very open Christian in Adam LaRoche or Fellowship of Christian Athletes group when their diametrically opposed teammates are in the same clubhouse...that's just one example. Sounds like it might have been the case with Fields.

QUOTE (chisox802 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 02:15 PM) Now we just need to trade for Puig and bring AJ back. Would be the most entertaining team in baseball. Don't forget Cespedes, too.

http://heavy.com/sports/2014/12/mat-latos-...instagram-blog/ Reminds me a little of Kris Benson's wife...seems she loves being on twitter/blogging. https://mobile.twitter.com/dallaslatos

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 02:09 PM) Might as well turn full heel (bad guy) and trade for Braun Better yet, Puig. You have been pretty outspoken about his character issues, what stories are you going on?

http://www.southsidesox.com/2016/2/9/10952...-year-3-million He's got a lot of arm tatts, that's for sure.

https://thedirty.com/gossip/miami/mat-latos...mat-latos-dick/ Here's just one example of what comes up when you search "matt latos is an ass----"

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:42 PM) Right, in this case he's not blocking a prospect and he's not taking a 25 man spot away from anyone that's a difference maker so there's not much opportunity cost there. It's three million, which is chicken scratch in today's market and he could possibly bounce back and have a 2-3 WAR season. It's a fine deal, they probably were able to convince him to sign based on playing time and Cooper. Unless you're a huge Erik Johnson fan...because you know Danks won't simply be released or relegated to the bullpen in spring training.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) Do not confuse risk with price. Risk =/= Price. They're associated, but you also have to factor in the likelihood of different levels of performance. A lottery ticket - a literal, actual lottery ticket - is high risk/high reward because even though it only costs a dollar, there is an overwhelmingly high chance of losing. The potential gain is great. Latos is closer to a lottery ticket than, I dunno, keeping your money under the mattress (which is low risk/low reward). Didn't mean to derail the thread, but I think the chances of Latos being a dud are greater than people are admitting. If this were Paulino, that would certainly be true...

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:39 PM) While this entire argument is stupid, I will repeat that we're not talking equities here & MLB free agency is a constrained market. We're paying a guy to be a 0.5 WAR player who also has a chance of being a 3+ WAR player. While he may not reach his 3+ WAR ceiling, the probability of him not earning his contract is nearly impossible and the possibility of him greatly exceeding it (2 WAR seems like a realistic floor) is highly likely. By your very definition, it's a low risk/high reward signing. Spot on. Wasn't Danks at 1.8 last year? On the current fa pitching market, that's supposedly worth $12-14 million.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) No good reason to trade Johnson unless you are getting a good young RF for him. Odds are good you will need both him and Turner this year. Unless you can get a certain maligned but talented Marlins' outfielder...would require more than Johnson and Garcia, though.

Well, there is the not insignificant risk that he doesn't mix well in the clubhouse, but we're not giving up a boatload like we did with Swisher at the time... Everyone felt the price tag without the pick attached was closer to $7-10 million.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:27 PM) For once, this is right. This is a three million dollar signing for a guy who when healthy can be a #2 starter, on a team that can use a RH SP at the top of their rotation. If the guy gives you problems, or sucks, you dump him. There really is not much risk when you consider he is only getting $2.5 million over minimum wage in MLB. Where else can you get a shot at a #2 starter for $3 million? Jose Quintana.

Necessary move. Now we need the outfield version of Latos. Robin will have his hands full dealing with a quite combustible clubhouse mix.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 07:31 AM) what the f*** are you talking about? You said Sanders was a cross between Larry David and woody allen, I agree with the first one and disagree with the second one. I didnt say anything about boycotting everyone that has worked with Woody Allen, i said WOODY ALLEN IS A WHINY ACCUSED CHILD RAPIST. So if you were the best dancer at Juilliard and I compared you to Michael Jackson and Prabhu Deva, your first response would be to take offense? If someone compares Rubio to Clinton as a politician, he should say I don't take it as a compliment because "I'm not a philanderer and accused rapist like him."

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 10:24 AM) That's clearly changed over the last few years has drafting and development has improved significantly. Nevertheless, we only have one position player currently projected to be a big league regular at the moment.

So every actor and actress that has worked with Woody Allen should be boycotted in your opinion? Where does political correctness begin and end? If the comparison was Bill Clinton, am I implicitly calling, let's say Marco Rubio, a rapist and womanizer if they have some of the same political traits and I had compared Rubio to Obama and Clinton?

http://news.yahoo.com/former-nyc-mayor-blo...-211730112.html