michelangelosmonkey

Sigh...so a single British newspaper reports, using a single unnamed source, that the presidents son-in-law said that it could spook the stock market...and you conflate that into conclusive evidence that Trump downplayed this to protect the stock market???? Listen...believe what you want to believe. But please aim for a little self awareness. Your hatred of the president is making YOU turn this into a political thing.

We don't know anything. We think we know things. The data is evolving at light speed. There are a thousand variables. The 1957 and 1968 viruses killed millions...and President Trump acted WAY more aggressively than Eisenhower or Nixon. He hasn't been perfect but to use this as a not stop smear campaign just seems like you are pointing a finger at someone for not being able to know what no one else knows.

I didn't say China flight ban. How could he stop US citizens from coming home? And again...WE DIDN'T KNOW how bad it was...we still don't. We are beginning to understand. Pushing for an easy cheap, readily available solution to the problem (hydroxocholorquine) that many doctors in the field were recommending and seemed to have positive results...was wrong? An he's an idiot for saying it? We also pushed hard at the beginning for ventilators and the country responded and now we have way more than we need...but not enough test kits...and that's the presidents fault. As for taking countries that are completely unlike the US, comparing them to the US in examples that help your argument, and then calling the President an asshole because some other experiments in different situations had more favorable outcomes? That is 100% political. At the beginning I liked to come to this sight because a lot of you were reading a lot about the virus, were synthesizing it down into good and bad news and offering interesting insight which was great...and now it has been taken over as a "Trump is a Monster and its all his fault" which is idiotic.

Can you sight your source material for where he said he ignored the virus because it would spook the stock market...or is this just you reading his mind? Again...we had NO IDEA about the seriousness of this thing (China lied and continues to lie). Need I remind you that the Swine Flu struck America when Obama was President and...HE DIDN'T SHUT DOWN THE COUNTRY AND PEOPLE DIED. He has blood on his hands!!! Please stop. This isn't political. This is an unknown virus and the president and the rest of us are doing the best that we can. I think sitting on the sidelines and shouting out criticisms every step a blind man takes is kind of nasty behavior. And the golf stuff is just stupid. This is supposed to be the virus page...go start a "Trump sucks page" and put the golf stuff there....I'd probably agree with you there.

Honestly Trump has spoken two hours every day about the virus for months. If you want to take out a few snippets here and there...you can weave a narrative to make it political...just understand what you are doing. As for you perpetuating the "hoax" story...https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/democratic-ad-twists-trumps-hoax-comment/. I know...now you will say factcheck.org is a Fox News puppet...whatever...this is what the world has become.

He made it that? You are a Democrat, fine...but also a mind reader? You know why he "ignored" the virus...which he didn't do...just acted in a way to an unprecedented situation which was guaranteed to be wrong in certain ways...as every other president would have done? I bring up the fact that the Virus is a non-political issue and your response is...Trump golfs too much? And all the problems are with the president?

I'm bothered by all the blaming. This is NOT Trump's fault...or the governors. This is nature that has come up with a new pitch that the batters haven't been able to figure out yet. Fernando Valenzuela's screwball in 1981. To listen to the president'S advice to "try to swing late" and shout WHAT AN ASSHOLE...then he says "go the other way with the pitch" and you shout "IDIOT...don't you know batting coaches agree that is the dumbest thing ever". Though really the batting coaches have no real answer either. I hate Trump's style but I'm also so sick of everything he does being criticized. 90% of all news stories since his inauguration?? A virus comes along and you guys with perfect hindsight says "we should have done this" or "we should have done that". But who knew that this wasn't SARS or MERS or Swine Flu? It was outrageous to put major travel restrictions on China in early February but that proved correct. His being positive in press conferences in a very scary situation for the simple folks is not a bad decision even if in retrospect some of the words sound stupid. Pushing things to the states...so we have 50 little labs trying to come up with a solution that balances outcomes makes some sense to me...I agree with Jerksticks that the economic ramifications for millions has to be considered. As for his defying the experts...you know for every expert telling the President...this is the worst thing to ever happen...there's another expert saying..."this is like the SARS scare. It will be gone in a month." And we still don't know. Ferguson's College of London model that showed 2.2 million US dead has now been discredited as bad math...but could we ignore that at the time? This clearly is a bad disease but we don't have an answer...we could wait for the vaccine just like we are waiting for the Cold vaccine. Everyone has an opinion no one has an answer. Just lots and lots of guesses. Honestly if there was a lottery system...everyone lines up and gets a ticket. You have a 1/1000 chance of instantly dying (330,000 dead in the US) but the other 999 get to go on with their normal lives and see Kopeck starting on Saturday...I would be first in line...especially given the other option...living under my bed with a 1/10,000 chance of dying...no baseball, no bars, no friends, no happiness?

She had a nice idea but she didn't follow through. Maybe it was too hard to follow through...I mean easy enough to find Lou Brock's 45 WAR after Cubs traded him or Bagwell's 80 WAR after Boston traded him. But what do you do when Tommy John who started with Cleveland, went to Sox for seven years and then other teams...If he had 24 WAR in those years but then was included in another trade...do you count the players the Sox got back in the second trade (residual John value)...and if there were multiple players in the trade you how much value is counted for John versus others. OK...it's impossible. Easy is best... at least it's baseball talk.

This is an idiotic and lazy way of calculating top trades by WAR. In a related note, Boston Braves have the greatest free agent signing by WAR of all time. Braves signed free agent Babe Ruth in 1935 and he put up a career 162.1 WAR (note...0.1 while playing with Braves).

Yes but what about the NBA players...a bunch got it back in February and now they are piling their corpses up like cord wood...oh wait. We are, right now at about 1 in 4,000 Americans dead from this...Italy during the plaque had 2,400 dead out of 4,000 and THEY didn't cancel baseball. I'm tired of hiding under my bed and I want to see Robert and Moncada and Jimenez hitting.

You do know Babe Ruth was one of the best pitchers in baseball while also being one of the best hitters. This idea that he was just a slow fat guy is from the pictures of him at the end of his career. He was 6'2 215 with amazing hand/eye coordination. I think historical basketball comparisons don't work...but baseball I think you can. I also don't think the science of throwing hard is new to this age. If we are going to discount all players before the 1970's...well then its a different thing. But it does seem that if someone is 3 deviations above the mean in 1907 we can't with confidence say that in 2020 the mean is now where three deviations above was in 1907 so bring Big Ed in the time machine and he's just a guy.

Allen had a 8.6 WAR in 1972 for the Sox...but I think the same for him and Belle...they only had a few years with the White Sox so can you really consider them part of your ALL TIME team? I mention Gossage who had an amazing year for the Sox as a reliever but most of his greatness was on another team...can you really include him on our team's all time list? If you went with greatest seasons ever you'd sure have Dick Allen on the team (and Wilbur Wood...who had 22.5 WAR over two year 71-72 seasons).

What is realistic about an all-time team? Walsh dramatically out pitched Cy Young in 1908. He had one of the greatest seasons ever by any player. He pitched 460 innings with a WHIP of .86. I mean just because it's a long time ago doesn't mean we should ignore him as part of our team's history. Most of Ty Cobb's greatness was more than 100 years ago. Should Detroit not have him as part of their ALL TIME team because it was really just too long ago?

Wait...are you being reasonable? This is SOXTALK...you make a claim and then defend it to the death in the face of all evidence. My dad loved Billy Pierce too he's not a bad choice...if I said you were an idiot for liking Scarlett Johansonn over Natalie Portman...I could support your idiocy with facts but it's really just a matter of taste. I love a bullpen of Foulke followed by Gossage with Thornton as your lefty specialist. Foulke was amazing.

Honestly you can't leave Ed Walsh off the list if it's a serious list. He averaged 9+ War over a six year period...including winning FORTY games one year. He had more WAR in a six year stretch than Billy Pierce had in 18 seasons. BP was a fine player but he never got more than 2% of required HOF voting while Walsh is a Hall of famer. Thornton had 13.5 War in his career...Goose Gossage had an 8.2 WAR in 1975 for the White Sox. I can see why he's not considered a White Sox...but he came up through their system and spent five years with them...before Bill Veeck traded him rather than pay him in free agency.

If you're serious about making a list you want to be objective right? You just about have to put in the hall of famers. The team has a 120 year history so it would be a bit weird to have too many from the last 20 years...especially because those were not particularly their greatest years...just the years that we remember the best. I think any serious person would put Thomas, Ventura, Fisk and Konerko on the starting list and I said by definition Baines has to be on the list as he's a HOF. That's more than fifty percent of your position players (and DH) from recent times. Dick Allen was amazing but only played three years with the Sox. If you go more than that you are denying the past. As for starters...Faber-Walsh-Lyons you just can't argue with based on WAR. Sale in a five year stretch had a 25 WAR which might be the greatest stretch in White Sox history (too lazy to check). Buerhle was uniquely great. So now you have 40% of the starters from recent times. I'm not sure you can really give the relief pitcher to Wilhelm who I don't think every pitched for the White Sox before he was forty. But ace is a weird as it wasn't really much of thing before 1970. I loved Goose Gossage...and he had a EIGHT WAR at 23 as a relief pitcher before those idiotic 70's Sox switched him to a starter and then lost him over money. The franchise has not been gloriously blessed with talent over 120 years...but half before 1970 and half after would make sense to me.

This is just not true. Rod Carew average 5.7 WAR over a ten year period and Nellie Fox averaged a 4.5 WAR over a ten year period...both second basemen with similar profile. Good defense, good base running, solid single hitting is worth a lot. Not every player has to be a power hitter. However...if you are without power one better be a + defender, a +fielder and have a plus +batting average or you end up being Willie Harris.

I'm not saying he's going to be Rod Carew...i'm saying that is the ceiling. Rod Carew was not a great hitter in the minors...hovering around .300 with .750 OPS in 1000 at bats. Nellie Fox was NOT a good base runner...stealing an average of 5 bases per year and being thrown out 5 times a year. Rod Carew was a much better base stealer. Nellie was a much better defensive player. Carew walked a lot more. Both were second basemen that basically hit singles (81% for Nellie, 79% for Carew, 58% for Frank Thomas for comparison sake). Best 10 year war for Fox was 4.5 per year. Best 10 year war for Carew was 5.7 per year. I think Nick will be a better defender than either. Better base stealer than Fox. Worse hitter than Carew. So I think a 10 year WAR of 5 average for his ceiling?

Carew played second base, averaged 6 homers per season and had a 7 year run averaging 7 WAR a season. Yes he was a legendary hitter but wasn't as good on defense as Madrigal looks to be. This idea that zero power = limited value isn't true. Yes you have to be unique but I think that has been the argument with Madrigal. He's unique.

Maybe they saw Rod Carew in Madrigal. There are superstars that are great fielders, with great speed and great bat control. Everyone doesnt have to be a masher.

Yes it seems if this is a multi year analysis Tatis obvious potential shouldn't matter.

Maybe but Tatis Jr had a really good half a season offensively and he's 6th.

Oh for fuck sake...this is what they wrote... Highest Ceiling: Vaughn Not only is Vaughn the best all-around hitter among first-base prospects, he's also on the short list of the best all-around hitters in the Minors. He could produce a .300 batting average, 30 homers and 80 walks on an annual basis. and let me be clear that would be absolutely nothing like Cody Bellinger, of the Dodgers, or Clay Bellinger of the Yankees, or minor leaguer Cole Bellinger or Orioles shortstop Mark Belanger in any way. Any similarities by Vaughn to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

It wasn't me...MLB Pipeline said Vaughn was best 1b prospect since Bellinger...maybe best hitting prospect in minors. Just saying Bellingers bat in the middle of that lineup is awe inspiring.

I thought it was clear I meant as a hitter. I wasnt talking about his FWAR...I was talking about OPS of 1.000 in the middle of that order. Its just so exciting....in the last 20 years who was our most exciting hitting prospect? In 2002 we would have been so excited about Collins the hitter...now we've got Moncado, madrigal, Jiminez, Robert and Vaughn, the batting champ and two plus- hitting vets...the potential is amazing.