caulfield12

There's no way to get Puig without going through Quintana or Sale. Why would the Dodgers want prospects/suspects when they have plenty of them already? They want close to sure things. Guaranteed performance. They're short term needing a third/fourth starter who's reliable/dependable. Montas and Avi are both far from that, or Tim Anderson as well. They might be willing to trade prospects for prosoects, but definitely not in this situation as the centerpiece.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 06:50 PM) Be honest and think here. In a movie theater, under fire, it's dark, only light is from the screen. You really think that under fire, probably from behind, you could turn around, aim, and get a clean shot off without accidentally hitting the wrong person? While the person has a semi-automatic handgun and can keep pulling the trigger? Per the police, as the crowd was leaving the theater this guy snuck into it and almost got out of the theater before someone stopped the crowd/stopped him. The people fleeing the room didn't identify the shooter as he left the theater with the group. They couldn't tell. Now you're telling me you could honestly figure out who the shooter was with enough accuracy to pull the trigger? The closest example of a mass shooting interacting with a person carrying a weapon I can think of is the Gabrielle Giffords shooting and the person across the street who had the gun nearly shot the wrong person. And that was in the daylight. And he had bright dyed orange hair...and it was still not easy in the dark.

I wonder if there's a close correspondence with the radio ratings? While the inferior product on the field is always the biggest consideration, number two might be the divisive presence of Hawk Harrelson. 1) Older White Sox fans might enjoy Harrelson more, but they're dying out...that generation of fans who grew up with Sox fandom in the 1950s and 60s. 2) The sandwich generation has moved on after the World Series title to getting married and raising their kids. 3) The World Series presented an opportunity in 2005-06 to capitalize on drawing a new younger generation of kids to Sox fandom but the organization clearly didn't capitalize on the opportunity and their interest was also drawn to the BlackHawks. These young fans perhaps don't enjoy grumpy/umpire conspiracy Harrelson as much, and don't get his historical references or golf tangents. 4) Young positional prospects (see Cubs) are generally more exciting for fans (and offense, in general) than building an arsenal of arms.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 04:07 PM) Probably Singapore. There was just an article at yahoo travel about how safe (unless you have weed or gum), hot/muggy, expensive and boring (mostly shopping malls and restaurants) it was there...the main point of the article was that tourism was way down in Singapore as well as Dubai.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 03:43 PM) Tex you are a great person and should run for office! Greg, basically you're describing a mixture of Donald Trump with the aggressive nature of Michael Douglas' character in the "white men fight back" movie Falling Down. While we've probably all sympathized with the breakfast at the fast food restaurant (why doesn't the food ever look like the pictures on the menu? I want my breakfast even though it's 10:31!) scene, perhaps threatening everyone with a handgun to get whatever you want won't work if everyone starts to do that. What if two Trumps meet each other? How will they avoid a "saving face" confrontation...and de-escalate it? From his appearance on the Scarborough show, it seems he wants to just provoke arguments over anything at this point. Imagine the leaders of Iran or North Korea did anything remotely offensive...like airing a propaganda/satire movie (The Interview crossed with You've Been Trumped). Is there any conceivable way to imagine they wouldn't be nuked out of existence? If someone shouted "you lie!" during a speech to Congress (or threw shoes at him) he'd just pull out a revolver and blast away. Is that what we really want to be teaching our children? For every would-be hero who saves someone, there are going to be ten who get themselves and a number of innocent bystanders killed. Do we want "good samaritan" laws that protect civilians who accidentally kill others in public with handguns?

I think one of the reasons the rake or slant of the upper deck became such an issue was the lack of a roof backdrop originally...the perception that it's safer or more protected to be up there. Undoubtedly the inclusion of the club/luxury boxes forced it as well, since the seats were getting pushed further away from the playing surface. If you could look from the upper deck and have a higher, unobstructed view straight towards the downtown skyline those tickets would be much easier to sell for night games. The feel would be totally different.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 03:03 PM) In some but not all cases of deaths caused by guns, the person would still be alive if a gun had not been present. How man children under the age of 12 or 14 die in accidental in-home shootings? One would have to follow the logic that without the presence of a deadly weapon that was accessible (for whatever reason), this category of deaths would be 98% preventable.

Luck and clutch don't exist in sabremetrics. They're just random variations that return to mean eventually.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 06:00 AM) Mike Hampton http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/pro...?P=Mark-Hampton One of our GreenJackets indy league signees during the strike year (1994-95). At least I had Hampton right. The first person I ever saw wearing a Devil Rays hat.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 09:49 PM) This one in Louisiana. There are dead and injured. http://news.yahoo.com/official-2-dead-movi...-015727028.html Our country is officially insane. I know a millionaire who is thinking about denouncing his US citizenship in 10 years when he retires and wants to move to I believe it's Thailand. Here in the USA our political system is worst it's ever been with our political officials failing to work for the people, only special interests. Our crime is off the charts BAD. These type of incidents are ON THE RISE with no signs of slowing. Our economy is horrible and there likely will be an amazing crash one of these days. America is in deep trouble. I'm not trying to start something here, but it remains just a matter of time before one of these nutjobs brings a machine gun into a sporting event. Don't know if they'll shoot the participants or the spectators but it's all set up for the nutjob. Wait until the second half of a basketball game or football game, storm the entrances and start shooting. Once that happens, sports will be changed forever. THIS LATEST INCIDENT angers me beyond belief!!! Quit killing each other, Americans! caulfield- does the world think the USA is beyond hope? No, they just think the U.S. is much more dangerous because of the endless repetition of all these mass shootings...and the fact that someone other than the police or military can own semi-automatic weapons. From living in Thailand for two years, I can honestly say it's 10x more dangerous for tourists and that the person renouncing his U.S. Citizenship will likely be in very precarious circumstances when the current king (longest serving monarch in the world) passes away.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 12:19 AM) I don't either, I'm just trying to start discussion. Edit: But wouldn't be more cost effective to trade for those guys now rather in a couple years When they're closer to the majors? Not unless they're players like Yoan Moncada, Alex Guerrero and Hector Olivera. They can't afford the bust rate of three teenagers who have a better chance of not reaching AA than they do of ever making a big league roster. If you're Hahn, you simply can't afford to be that patient or the rebuild will be a decade-long project.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 07:53 PM) So the Detroit Tigers owe Verlander about 28 million a year for 2016, 17, 18 and 19. Bear with me a second. Let's say the Tigers let somebody else sign Verlander instead of giving him that ridiculous contract. Would it have killed the Tigers? Buried the Tigers? No. The SMART PLAY if you are a GM of any team is simply refuse to give big contracts to pitchers. Just say no. Ha ha to Detroit. Final comment on this: Let's say Verlander becomes so rotten he gets hammered almost every start the rest of his contract. Do they make him a long reliever at 28 mill a year? It's all Monopoly money in sports, but unfortunately the money the customer spends is not Monopoly money. Gimme a 10 dollar beer please and an 8 dollar hot dog, I'm hungry. See Barry Zito, Mark Hampton or Darren Dreifort.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 10:52 PM) Not at all. Maybe he will replace Emilio soon. Does Emilio get all his money if we release him Yep, and the option buyout next year as well.

It's the "just get us into the playoffs, anything can happen" move, not "go for broke" like we saw with Beane last year...it's the smart play for a team that looks extremely well-positioned for the next 4-5 seasons, and arrived on the playoff scene one year ahead of schedule.

Hitters in tonight's starting line-up are now 11 for 65 on the season against Bauer. .169 Kipnis is killing lefties this year, .369 and ops well over 1000. If you added Beckham, Sanchez and Bonifacio, you might get to 1.000.

Has anyone actually watched the full documentary? As far as Asians go, they're not only discriminated against for being Asian, they're also reverse-discriminated against in college admissions acceptances for being too good at test-taking, so universities will deny admission for more white, African-American and Hispanic students in order to maintain a semblance of ethnic balance.

But those were both clutch RBI's!

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:03 PM) I still think he stays. And signs long term. That makes no sense unless we're already spending money in anticipation of the 2019 tv broadcast rights deal. The only $100+ million contract divvied out will be for a younger, bonafide ace in the 24-28 age range.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:32 PM) Nieto is not a scouting failure. We gave up nothing for him. If he had a 1% shot of being a big league catcher it was still a good move. Let's just say it continues to fit the narrative of swinging and missing whenever it involves developing players at premium positions. Who knows, maybe Tyler Saladino will shock the world, but Josh Phegley had a stretch where he looked like he could make an impact as well. Heck, even Jerry Owens and Josh Fields did in 2007. Would still love to know if we ever had a shot at Donaldson and what was offered...or if Beane simply targeted Lawrie from the beginning (like the Davidson and Nestor Molina acquisitions on our side).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:32 PM) Honestly, yes, I think we'd still 100% be that deep in pitching. We're not low on pitching until we trade Quintana or Sale. I've said before and will say again, unless EJ implodes again, I'm 100% ok with a Sale, Q, Rodon, Johnson, Danks rotation to start next year with Danks departing after a month or two for replacement by Fulmer. Puts Fulmer on the same path as Rodon (even gets him more minor league time since he signed so much sooner), gets Johnson and Fulmer nearly full big league seasons so we're not counting on them as rookies in 2017, and even leaves us with an obvious top 6, with Montas and Danish appearing in the rearview as guys who could also come up late in 2016 or in 2017 depending on how they lok. You clear out Danks...we still have a nice slot for Fulmer next year. You get those back 3 some legit experience in the bigs in 2016 and you've got a rotation that could be really, really good and really really cheap in 2017 and still leave us with pitchers at AAA who can step in, take bullpen roles, or even serve as the main chip in a trade for a major player. I kinda get the Buehrle thing, I really do. I just want the open space for those rookies. Buehrle would make all the sense in the world as the final rotation piece for the 2017 roster. 2016, not so much.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:24 PM) The White Sox should do everyone a favor, themselves included, and just fold. It might perhaps be easier to hire people who are better at talent evaluation on the position player side...and changing the philosophy of their entire minor league system. They might make incremental changes like a Paddy here and the new assistant GM, but those guys aren't game changers. It's not rocket science here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:09 PM) I'd be saying "Well they added a catcher at the lower levels, they must have liked him, this definitely fills a need in our system and I hope he can make the bigs in a couple years". And that there's zero belief Nieto (who we invested time in grooming) and Kevan Smith and maybe Austin are unlikely to be long-term solutions at that position. Nieto has almost fallen off the map this year after receiving his fair share of compliments last season. Another scouting failure? Well, it's hard to be encouraged, that's for sure. We aren't hitting on a single lottery ticket.

The problem is the options are limited because few teams want to give up impact players on offense now, especially at premium positions. Let's say the White Sox threw the name Domingo Santana out there with Houston, a prospect maybe a notch above Avisail but certainly with bust concerns like all youngsters (Jose Tabata, Snider and now Polanco would come to mind if we were talking about the Pirates' system). Luhnow will give up the Kazmir package 100 times in a row before he parts with a Santana. And that's a GM with a stable of talent that added to the future stockpile this past draft. If you're Hahn, 90% of you is of the belief that a compensation pick's impact will come way too late to save your job the way things are currently setting up with the free agent markets over the next two off-seasons. You also don't have the ability to spend more than this past offseason, and the impact names (Wieters, Gordon, Cespedes, Heyward) are going to cost an arm and a leg. It's almost an impossible solution to solve. Logic dictates that only by substantially improving 3-4 other positions can you have a legit chance of improving the team substantially. On the other hand, the allure of that one big name (Russell Wilson or Cruz this past year) can be quite difficult to pass up. The one thing we do know is that this means trading Quintana or even Sale...and hitting that trade out of the park. The two superstars model didn't get them anywhere last year. Undoubtedly, we will be underwhelmed by any initial trade/compensation outcome because there's simply zero faith in our ability to coach up those A+ and AA hitters and groom them for the majors. Most importantly, there's simply no time to be patient if you go back to that three year window. What ends up happening is you get lesser impact because the ceilings on the near major league ready position players will be lower.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2015 -> 10:21 PM) I disagree. Hillary has the journos in her hip pocket. Their only coverage of Republican candidates is trying to get them to blast each other publicly, i.e. the Trump thing. Guys ... Trump is sort of a chump, but he wasn't trying to say all Mexicans are bad. I like the fact Cruz wouldn't bite. He said, "all the media wants us to do is blast each other; I won't go there." If Trump was a Demo there'd be no coverage of this; it'd remain all Hillary all the time. I hope you guys are ready for eight years of Hilly; she's a lock to win. Hope she leads the country back on track. Cruz is just bring a politician...he wants all those "supporters" to come over to him when Trump eliminates himself from contention...at least as many as possible.

http://www.heraldextra.com/entertainment/m...805a5c4d76.html Sandler has to learn he can't keep insulting 50% of his audience. Recently, it was posing with a dolled up Selena Gomez while he and James looked like schlubs in sweats or fighting with Rose McGowan about sexist casting call role descriptions. I guess if Kevin James can be the president and act like this (and lots still went to Mall Cop II despite terrible reviews), then so can The Donald...it's the backlash to the political correctness backlash. Not sure which is worse. Part of the problem is that it's unclear who the filmmakers think their audience is. This is a big-budget spectacle about 1980s nostalgia aimed at kids who have no emotional connection to the decade. "Pixels" is also insanely sexist, culminating with the winning male characters each rewarded with a woman. Seriously, they get human women as prizes. They literally call one a trophy. The first introduction to these guys as grown-ups is the two of them discussing which Hollywood actresses are hottest. Sam is a loser who feels his best days are 30 years behind him, at the arcade. He's the kind of guy who shows up to the White House wearing shorts and hits on the pretty homeowner whose theater system he's installing. When she rejects him but ends up driving behind him on the street, he declares to no one: "She went from zero to psycho in 3.4 seconds." Because women are crazy, get it?!