Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 09:48 PM) Why do people put Cease and Hansen on the same tier? That makes me want to sell Cease, because Hansen is SO MUCH BETTER. That said, you make the "Cease/Hansen" Cease, drop the Stephens/Guerrero part and make Burger someone Sheets or less and it's not a terrible proposal, though not one I'd want the Sox to do, either. I agree with you on Hansen being a way better prospect than Cease, but no way would I trade Giolito, Cease, & Sheets for one year of Machado. I think you can make a strong argument that Giolito alone is more valuable than Machado. All it takes is him being a 2 WAR/year pitcher and he clearly has more upside than that if all goes right.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 09:57 PM) Well, he is. It is ok to bring them up every once in a while in casual conversation but the constant barrage of snide comments, if you're doing it in a logical, constructive conversation it is one thing, but trying to antagonize me by making snide comments constantly shows a lack of respect. A workplace is supposed to be a team, the way I look at it is the people that are being paid more or are in higher positions than you are there because they have been doing it longer. Everyone is there because they bring something different to the table. I'm there to learn and do the tasks assigned. I guess I don't look at my boss, or anyone in that matter as an authority figure, but someone who is there because they have more knowledge than I do on the subject. If somehow the members of the team are not allowed to constructively criticize each other because there is some sort of pecking order, then the world is more f***ed than I gave it credit for. Everyone is supposed to be working toward a common goal, right? If I have valid, evidence-based reasons to disagree with someone(I'm talking about actually doing the job here, not politics), and it is good for the team/organization why should I keep my mouth shut, and let the team fail? If someone is so insecure that they can't take being made to look stupid when they have a stupid idea or process to get a job done, then they probably shouldn't be working. You brush it off and take it as a learning experience. I'm sure that everyone has been made to look stupid at one point or another at work, right? First rule of business is your never purposely make your boss look stupid. If you can’t understand that point, then I’m not sure you’re cut out for the corporate world.

QUOTE (Tony @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 08:20 PM) Yeah, 1 is actually my least favorite. Maul is a cool character, but I at least sort of enjoyed the huge Jedi fight in the arena in Attack of the Clones, and love me some Jango Fett. 1 was just such a kids movie, it's really hard for me to watch. The Pod Racing, Jar Jar, all of the Gugan stuff really, Jake Lloyd being...not a good child actor. Just a rough one. Agreed, episode one is easily the worst. Darth Maul may be a cool looking character but he also has zero depth to him. He alone doesn’t overcome all the wrongs with the film.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 06:10 PM) What actually happened to me was an indirect firing; My boss somehow found out my political views and started harassing me about them, I spoke up and said: "Can we just leave politics out of this, it has zero to do with my ability to do a job for you." My boss then chewed me out and I was subsequently dismissed. How was your boss harassing you exactly?

Diehard Orioles are starting to lose it. Hard to blame them, would suck to lose a star like Machado for basically nothing. Also, look at this proposed offer one of their fans came up with:

Jack, what exactly did you do on social media that caused you to get fired? Did you rip your company or bosses at all?

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 05:10 PM) Where did I say that there are no consequences for one's actions? Of course I know that actions have consequences, whether positive or negative. You don't mess with people's livelihood over petty s*** like political disagreement. Laws are there for a reason. If you're not breaking laws, there is zero reason for one to be fired for having personal beliefs. If businesses can't separate a person's personal and professional life, and you think it is okay to not have them be two completely separate entities, then I can't help you. What my employees do in their free time is none of my business. So you’d be ok with your employees posting hateful rhetoric on social media?

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 03:00 PM) I would bet that if he makes a list it will be on mlb pipeline but I think he's off BA/Fangraphs/Law. He was 37th & 40th respectively on Baseball America & mlbpipeline’s mid-season top 100 lists, I’d be shocked if he completely dropped off them after a poor half season. I think he’ll be in the 80 to 100 range on both those lists. You’re right about Fangraphs though, he won’t make the cut. I feel pretty confident he’ll make two of the big three lists.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 12:51 PM) I just don't know how Rutherford can be a top 100 prospect at this point. That's really crazy. Maybe he will develop, but if there aren't 100 prospects in the minor leagues you would take in exchange for him right now, the game may be in trouble. He’s still young with plus tools, he’ll most definitely be a top 100 prospect.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 09:41 AM) Angelos is going to turn 89 during the season. I don't think a full rebuild fits his schedule. He's pretty much screwed either way. lol...good point.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 09:40 AM) I agree with this. Probably don’t get less, but getting much more would require a desperate buyer though. I still think they’re better off trading him now and moving some other pieces like Britton, but it doesn’t sound like they want to rebuild. Whoops, looks like they blew that idea. Britton out six months with a ruptured Achilles. The Orioles are a f***ing mess.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 09:22 AM) I don't think they'll get less at the deadline. Probably get the same amount if not more. I agree with this. Probably don’t get less, but getting much more would require a desperate buyer though. I still think they’re better off trading him now and moving some other pieces like Britton, but it doesn’t sound like they want to rebuild.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 02:22 PM) To be fair, those were generation changing movies. No one has made a Star Wars impact of a movie since Star Wars. A few might have visited the neighborhood, but none of moved in. These movies were to movies what The Beatles are to music. No doubt that’s a big part of the magic. Clearly they were movies ahead of their time. But A New Hope just felt like this epic adventure in a vast new world filled with all sorts of mysteries and interesting characters. The problem I have with this new trilogy (so far) is its the same basic formula but without bringing anything fresh to the table. They have this vast universe of unlimited potential and they’re simply going to recycle Stormtroopers, Death Stars, & evil Sith Lords again & again. Take us someplace new with the story for f***’s sake. And invest just a little bit of time into making these worlds feel like actual places and not just the “salt mining” planet. These never have to be the deepest of movies with overly complicated plot structures, but try to wow us with fresh new stories, characters, & worlds that let our imaginations run wild like they did as kids. Maybe the next trilogy will be able to succeed in that regard by not having any tie-ins to the existing films.

I enjoyed the movie for the most part, but have also given up on the idea that Star Wars will ever be special again. They’ll continue to recycle the same story lines over & over (this started with episode 6), they’ll continue double-down on the cheese & tone-breaking humor, they’ll continue to ignore character development for all but a handful of characters, and they’ll continue to make lore & background info generally less important. These movies have become Disney family-fun popcorn films and that’s fine. I think people need to accept that the magic from A New Hope & Empire Strikes Back is pretty much gone and not to take it personally. These are at least far better movies than Lucas’ new trilogy. Can’t really expect much more from Disney TBH.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 01:50 PM) I was assuming "Knights of Ren" was the long lived group that he had joined a-la when Vader joined the "Sith". I always assumed it was his group, but honestly I don’t know. Here’s a quote that supports this idea: Here’s a theory on the Knights of Ren being those same boys. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.inverse.co...dents-jedi-kylo

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 04:36 PM) Sort of on the same thread as this, something caught my attention during Luke’s version of the flashback. He said when he woke up that Kylo had taken some apprentices with him, and killed the rest. So where are the force users that he took with him? I’m assuming those are the Knights of Ren and I thought they showed them briefly in the TFA during a dream or flashback sequence. If so, are they still alive and where have they been? Maybe they’ll make an appearance in the final movie.

QUOTE (Soha @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 09:20 AM) If you followed along in the draft this past summer, the Sox made it clear they wanted to draft high school kids. There just were runs on them before their picks and it didn't work out well. Nick Hostetler evens mentions they want to spread out the talent in this article: https://theathletic.com/187901/2017/12/18/q...-hes-ever-seen/ Sounds like we might be going HS heavy in this next draft which makes a ton of sense. Would also be nice to see some LatAm signings actually make an impact stateside.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 07:17 AM) I tend to ignore most of these "inside sources" rumors. Did we see accurate rumors of the Stanton deal as it ended up before it happened? Oh I agree, but the Diamondbacks rumor actually makes some sense to me form AZ’s perspective. Move some spare parts and get a huge upgrade in Machado in a going for it season and then recoup a draft pick next offseason. I just don’t see why on earth Baltimore would want those pieces.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 06:41 AM) Drury is involved, not Lamb. I think that package is better than Cease and Adams I haven’t seen that anywhere (these all rumors anyways), but I’d probably prefer Cease & Adams. At least Cease offers star potential if he hits. If you swap Adams for Fulmer I think it’s no doubt a better deal unless you really believe in Drury.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 11:16 PM) That’s now eight teams who have enquired about Machado, six of which putting offers in front of the #Orioles. Popular. https://twitter.com/DanClarkSports/status/942980240241975296 Diamondbacks also in on #Machado - one of the bigger offers to date including position player(s), a mid-rotation arm, and multiple prospects. https://twitter.com/DanClarkSports/status/942979939032117248 Sounds like a lot on the surface, but it’s probably Jake Lamb (3 years), Patrick Corbin (1 year), & a couple middling prospects. I’d love for the Orioles to accept that, because there is no chance in hell the Diamondbacks can afford Machado long-term. What’s really shocking to me is that Orioles fans want to trade Machado and still somehow compete against the Yankees & Red Sox. They should just be blowing the whole damn thing up and acquiring as much high ceiling talent as possible. I have a feeling their fanbase is going to be extremely dissapointed with the eventual return if the requirement is major league pieces or prospects on the cusp.

QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 01:59 PM) Lester and Heyward are almost half that $100M. If he finds a way to dump those 2 salaries like I was saying, he's virtually replacing them with Harper and Machado. The number $30-$40M/each was being used for both these guys. Using $30M per you're replacing $54M (Lester/Heyward/Zobrist) with $60-65M (Machado/Harper). Only reason I brought Red Sox into it is to give some historical perspective. Theo found a way to convince that ownership...and it paid off. I honestly think Ricketts has good reason to trust Theo Epstein. I don't know...his track record kind of warrants it. Not saying it would happen...it's just not THAT far-fetched of an idea for a deep-pocket team to take a chance on 2 guys like Machado and Harper and still be about $30-35M behind the Dodgers--who by the way have seen the monetary benefit of a payroll that high or they wouldn't have approved it. I know we all don't want to see the Cubs get these guys, but it's not that far from reality...they are in the position to do it whether we like it or not. No offense, but this all comes off as a Cubs fanboy circle jerk. What do you mean "if he finds a way to dump those salaries"? Heyward is unmovable at this point, I don't care what kind of magician you think he is. Lester is probably going to be unmovable soon enough, but let's say he isn't, then who replaces him in the rotation exactly? The Cubs have almost no internal pitching talent at the moment. And I'm not sure how you think Theo is going to convince the Ricketts to spend more than they're comfortable with or what their debt load allows. Again, what the Red Sox were able or willing to do has nothing to do with the Cubs. The Ricketts are simply not going to commit to three massive long-term contracts, way too risky for an ownership group that recently had to sell equity in the team to ensure enough on-going cash flow.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 01:50 PM) I think the type of team that would make most sense would be a team like the Nationals, consistently there, window about to be closing, one last push to make a WS. But, obviously they aren't and their roster doesn't make sense. The cards are the other team that could make sense, but they clearly still see their team and roles as one that is consistently competitive and aren't going to risk it. The Yankees aren't in that mold but make sense in that they were nearly a WS team last year and expect to bid on his services the year thereafter. So, again, I think it sucks for the orioles market right now because it's a bunch of teams that are basically telling the orioles that his 2018 production means nothing to them so they aren't going to pay that much for it. So you're saying a Fulmer + Stephens package just might work

QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 01:27 PM) I mean...I agree...but Theo is creative and he could find ways to make it happen. More years/less per year, moving Lester/Heyward/maybe even Zobrist, talking a player down to make a championship run. My guess is that he's not THAT concerned with the luxury tax--given that his Red Sox were usually over when he was there and and his main competition was ALWAYS over it in NY. The luxury tax threshhold for 2018 is $197 million. If Machado and Harper made $30m each, that leaves $137 million to build the rest of their roster--a number that would have been 16th in MLB--right above teams like Cleveland and Houston. A payroll of $197 million would still only be 5th overall in MLB (using 2017 MLB numbers) and about $45 million LESS than the Dodgers. First off...It's insane money, I get it...but I bet Theo could write Machado's and Bryce's checks, bump his remaining salaries by $13 mil to spend $150 million on the remaining roster (only about $20 million less than his payroll from last year--for a total of $210 million). He'd be $13 million over the luxury tax line, costing him a whopping $2.2 million (lol) in luxury tax penalties...and STILL NOT have the highest payroll in MLB by a longshot. He would have Machado, Harper and a $150 million dollar roster around them. There may be some revenue benefits that follow that type of move. Theo may not care about the luxury tax, but the Ricketts sure as s*** do. How the Red Sox operated has nothing to do with how the Cubs operate. Also, the Cubs had nearly $100M in 2019 payroll commitments to like six players before they recently added a couple more relievers. Add in all their arbitration eligible players and that number is going to quickly skyrocket. Add in a hypothetical $75M for Machado & Harper and they’ll be well over the luxury tax. And I’m sure the Ricketts would love having three large, long-term contracts on their books at the same time. No risk there based on how the first one is shaking out.

QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 12:21 PM) Makes sense for the Cubs actually. I actually do think I would trade 4 controlled years of Russell for 1-year of Machado. They have Baez and Happ ready to contribute where needed. It'd probably save some money on a 5th starter too, because frankly they really wouldn't need a good one! I also believe Machado would fall in love with the city and the baseball atmosphere surrounding the Cubs and would re-sign because they are a team that is set up to contend for the majority of his prime. Plus, if they found a way to dump Heyward and somehow lure Bryce (which wouldn't be all too difficult with Bryant, Rizzo and Machado there), that would be an unbelievable situation. Lots of ifs. But ifs of this magnitude rule out most teams. Typically contending teams with bright futures and deep pockets can endure risk of this caliber. As for us...I think it would be great to see Machado here. But just don't think it's a good fit in a trade situation, NOW--in the event he resigns somewhere else. Could you imagine losing 2+ key pieces of our rebuild for a meaningless year of Machado (good or bad)? Do you think it's worth it to add him with the thought of flipping him at the deadline if we get the inclination he would not resign with us? That would limit the risk a little, but a deal for a mega-star player like Machado would take a while to complete. I do still think a team could part with a VERY TOP prospect at the deadline to get Manny Machado for their stretch run, with the inside track on resigning him if things went well. He's one of the very few who I think could make a difference large enough to justify that. I don't know...just ramblin' some thoughts. There is no way in hell the Cubs are finding someone to take Heyward’s contract. And there’s no way in hell the Ricketts are signing both Machado & Harper even if those players would. The Cubs’ core is about to hit arbitration and start getting very expensive. Just not happening. And if the Cubs were to move Russell (or another major league piece) they’d be wise to use him toward a TOR starter and not another bat. They really don’t have a lot minor league chips to leverage anymore. Regardless, all this Cubs talk is nonsense and is simply intended to drive more clicks for these baseball writers.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 11:56 AM) Are there any updates on this story or was this an overreaction to news reports that weren't fully vetted? There has been a lot of discussion as to why the White Sox would trade assets for a possible 1 year rental and/or if Machado/White Sox would be willing to come to an agreement on a large deal with other big market teams likely interested next off-season.... Should we expect any Machado news in the near future and/or at all? The rumor is to expect a decision by the end of this week one way or the other. And that probably makes sense, because whether they keep or sell Machado greatly impacts the rest of their offseason.