Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 16, 2018 -> 02:00 PM) ask and ye shall receive watch Paul Ryan say nearly the same thing after multiple mass shootings Thoughts and Prayers and NRA Funding QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 16, 2018 -> 02:00 PM) Marco Rubio has $3.3 million reasons why no gun law would ever stop what happened. Paul Ryan has received a ton from gun rights groups. You might get a kick out of this: https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/paul-rya...r-1162885187935 Thank you both!

Is there a way to see which politicians receive sizable donations from the NRA? I want to know how much guys like Paul Ryan & Marco Rubio get from them vs. other politicians. And how many times has Paul Ryan done the “now is not the time to discuss gun control” BS? Surely there has to be a video all the different times he’s spewed that garbage edited together. There’s got to be a way to hold these f***s accountable for the lives they’re partly responsible for taking.

I can’t wait to see Cordell on the field. There’s something about this kid has me excited. I think his physical abilities are a little undervalued as it sounds like he’s a five tool talent even if none of them are truly plus. I hope they give him plenty of time in CF this spring and see if there’s any chance he could stick there. He claims it’s his position of choice which I’ll take a positive for now.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Feb 16, 2018 -> 07:15 AM) Yes, they did scout him and did sign him. In fact they gave Tatis a pretty big signing bonus -- something like $2.5 million, IIRC. Then they never gave him a chance to play, trading him for arguably the worst player then in the majors. It's a head shaker. They gave him $825k which isn’t that much. Hell, they gave Franklin $1.5M in that signing class.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2018 -> 07:03 AM) So they only get dinged for trading him. Apparently they don't get any credit at all for scouting him and signing him. This is exactly why people get so angry about the trading getting brought up ad naseum. I’m just not sure how much credit I give them for scouting him. If they had any idea what they had on their plates, they never would of traded him, at least not for James Shields. To me, that’s a huge reason this trade makes me sick to my stomach. He’s the only guy we’ve actually signed out of LatAm who has made a real impact stateside and we gave him up before he even came to the US. Preller straight-up out-scouted us on a guy in our own system. That’s the biggest issue I have with the trade.

QUOTE (wrathofhahn @ Feb 15, 2018 -> 07:20 PM) The point I was making is that WAR isn't linear. It accounts for scarcity via the positional adjustment. So if you are a star SS and there is a lack of quality SS in the league that is accounted for. The same goes for CF and so on. The rest of your post I don't agree with. You keep saying that stars are more valuable because they only take up one position but like I stated earlier I don't take that view. In my opinion when you look at FA and how fangraphs does the dollar per war figure often it's inflated versus what they get in FA. Thats because teams recognize they need to fill out the rest of the roster and thats hard to do in a 152 million dollar payroll (league average last year) while still paying stars what they are worth. I could break it all down but I already have in other threads b. I actually make the case the opposite is true for example Baseball reference indicates there were 153 players with 300 PA or more with WAR less then or equal to 2. 89 less then or equal to 1. Lets go with 1. That means on average teams carried three players who received significant amount of PA who contributed 1 WAR or less. Thats just positional players not even taking into account your bullpen or starting pitching. Lets say they instead got 2 WAR from those players. Thats at minimum an extra 3 WAR production in some cases more depending on who they are replacing. What is 2 WAR going for in FA? EDIT: I just googled when typing up this post should have known fangraphs already did a similar study. Could have saved myself some time it confirmed much of the research you can read it here: https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-lineari...f-cost-per-win/ and https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-recent-...-agent-pricing/ And these articles don't even get into the regression and return on investment that these players provide in the latter half of their deals. I have no idea what that fangraphs study even means. GMs may very well pay on a linear $/WAR basis, our argument is they should not and value each incremental WAR more than the previous. The best example I have of this would be fantasy football related. David Johnson was predicted to outproduce all other players by a f***ton last year (ignore the injury for argument’s sake). Anyone fortunate enough to get him would of theoretically had a huge advantage. In auction leagues, you should have paid a huge premium to land him because there is a finite number of roster smarts and he’s an absolute difference maker. The goal is any sport is to get the most overall value out of your finite number of spots and there’s a theoretical limit of much value (or WAR) that can be generated based on the number of superstars in the game. Every time you miss on a superstar you’re team is theoretically capped off a little bit more. It’s exactly why a 8 WAR player four 2 WAR players. There has to be a premium for elite talents whether or not those players ultimately receive it as free agents. Unfortunately for them, there is a ton of risk inteams signing to guys to 8+ year deals that they may not ultimately get their fair share.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 15, 2018 -> 07:07 PM) Semi-automatic AR-15 are excellent sport rifles. Mostly because the round isn't very big. It's not much bigger than a .22. The only adavantage is the light weight. So, I guess you could ban them. But my fear is that someone would just to a bigger round which would cause more damage. It’s not about the size of the round, it’s the fact that someone with an AR-15 can fire off an insane number of rounds in a short period of time (with a relatively high level of precision to boot), especially when combined with high capacity magazines. There are plenty of other rifles that could be used for sport shooting that aren’t nearly as deadly as an AR-15. Again, I respect your right for gun ownership, but I can’t justify assault weapons being legal when they’re literally used in mass shootings on what seems like a weekly basis. Time for them to go and see if things get better.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 15, 2018 -> 06:16 PM) There is nothing wrong with the semi-automatic version of the AR-15 which is the legal version he had. Just be glad that he liked this weapon (because of it's reputation) and not many other more powerful semi-automatic rifles. Why does any civilian need an AR-15? I’m pro gun ownership, but there is absolutely no reason for assault weapons to be legal. They should not be used for hunting or sport and are beyond unnecessary for self defense unless you’re worried about someone else who has one. I’m sure they’re fun to f*** around with, but there is no practical purpose for them and therefore no justification to allow everyday people to have them, especially not when there are weekly shooting sprees involving them.

100% agree and have been arguing this for a while. Each incremental WAR should be worth more given there are a finite amount of spots on the field and the scarcity of stars in the game.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 15, 2018 -> 07:35 AM) It's time for Little Marco to take his $3.3 million in contributions from the NRA and go home: Rubio rejected calls for gun control in an interview with Fox News after the Parkland shooting, saying it was the wrong time to discuss such efforts “because people don’t know how this happened.” “I think it’s important to know all of [the facts] before you jump to conclusions that there’s some law we could have passed that could have prevented it,” he said. “There may be, but shouldn’t we at least know the facts? I think that we can always have that debate, but ... you should know the facts of that incident before you run out and prescribe some law you claim could have prevented it.” I'm so sick of these f***ers spewing this bulls***. The only fact that's relevant here is the shooter used an AR-15 style assault weapon. The only practical purpose for having such a weapon is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. No civilian needs one. Let's get rid of these f***ing things. It shouldn't be that hard unless you're on the NRA's payroll.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Feb 15, 2018 -> 07:13 AM) Engel's appeal is not based solely upon his elite defense and athleticism. He is also very fast and possesses legitimate power. It's easy to understand why management might want to give him every opportunity to learn to hit. Whether, or not, he is able to accomplish that is very questionable, but I'm rooting for him. He is one of those guys who probably spent too much time playing another sport. Perhaps if he had concentrated more on baseball and less on football, he would be further along in his development, as a hitter. The upside may be tantalizing but the odds of him ever putting it altogher seem super low. Given that we have a potential superstar in Robert who could be ready by opening day 2020 (I know I’m being optimistic here), I just think we’re better off using this season developing a guy who has a better chance of serving as a potential transitional CF until Luis is ready. And in that regard, I think Leury, Cordell, & even Tilson make far more sense. Look, I won’t be upset if they give Engel one last shot, but I hope it’s a really short leash. Can’t waste too much time on a guy that has shown no ability to hit major league pitching when other attractive options exist. And I still think Leury deserves an extended look in CF after how well he performed there last year pre-injury.

What need’s to happen from a political standpoint to finally see some change here? What branches of the government do the Democrats need control of to actually get some policy done? I need some hope here, because right now it just seems like the entire government is a complete & epic joke that will never do anything about gun violence.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 14, 2018 -> 07:54 PM) Where exactly are you seeing this? I don't think I've seen anyone literally say that today. I’ve seen it on the news, on twitter, etc. And I’ve seen it multiple times in this very thread along with other shooting-related threads. I’ve seen you yourself make this very claim on this website. I have no problem if someone is against guns, but the “let’s get rid all of guns” rhetoric isn’t going to accomplish anything. It’s never going to happen in this country. I want actual change and people right now should be demanding an assault weapons ban. That’s something that should theoretically be feasible. It won’t necessarily prevent mass shootings but it would sure as s*** reduce the death tolls. I just have no faith in the government or the people who elect it to the do right thing.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 14, 2018 -> 06:37 PM) You are completely correct, that would be a great step in the right direction, i'd add stop producing the associated ammo. But statistics DO prove that severely reducing the number of guns would correlate with severely reducing the number of mass shootings. I’m sure it would, but it’s just not a realistic solution. Too many people in this country (right or wrong) love their guns and will not give up that right. But there is so much low hanging fruit here it’s an absolute shame we haven’t made an ounce of progress since Sandy Hook. Our government has completely failed us.

Adolfo coming in at #17 is pretty ridiculous IMO. Check out his power & walk numbers over the last three months of the season, the kid was making some serious progress. Obviously he has work to do on the strikeouts, but there is so much upside here I feel like he should be in the top 12 without question.

I really wish the far left didn’t scream “get rid of all guns” every time we have a shooting like this. That’s never going to happen and just gives the pro-gun crowd the ammo they need to make no changes. The focus should be on getting rid of completely unnecessary things like assault weapons & high-capacity clips and putting far stricter restrictions /controls in place for general gun ownership. That won’t stop everything but it would be a huge step in the right direction. Unfortunately our completely broken government will never get that done.

Thanks for sharing Y2Jimmy!

I will add that Merkin seems to be hyping Engel up as the favorite, which may or may not mean anything.

I’m voting for Leury to be the primary CF to the start the season, but I think the Sox employ a bit of a platoon with Engel getting the nod on opening day. Having said that, I do think Cordell eventually steals this job with a surprising bat & passable CF defense.

So to continue with the opening day roster predictions, I wanted to see how people thought CF would shake-out. This seems to be a wide open competition with four guys who could ultimately land the job. The poll includes two separate questions (primary CF vs. opening day CF) since we’re likely to face a lefty on opening day in Danny Duffy.

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Feb 13, 2018 -> 06:42 PM) What makes you think this team is going to get a big TV deal? They can't even get a radio deal now. They’ll get a “big” TV deal because sports are in demand for cable & satellite providers right now. While it will be nowhere near the size of the bigger ones a few teams have landed over the past few years, it should be an upgrade over what they’re currently getting today. And I hve no idea why radio has to do with anything. Radio isn’t really a huge source income anymore for the vast majority of teams.

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Feb 13, 2018 -> 06:00 PM) In case some people don't understand what I think about the future of this team, this is how I see this playing out. JR is not going to spend any money on this team the next 2 seasons. The White Sox will have one of the lowest if not the lowest payrolls in MLB. He will put the team up for sale sometime in 2019 and the new owner will takeover in 2020. The new owner will be buying a White Sox team with a low payroll and no big long term contracts on the books. The value of the team increases with no big money on the books. JR bought the White Sox in 1981 with those same circumstances. In the meantime the next 2 seasons the team is going to be "Mired In Mediocrity" again. Hmmm, interesting that the Tribune Company executed the exact opposite strategy when they sold the Cubs. And why does having no money on the books increase the team’s overall value? 90% of potential owners are buying a team because they want to actually win a championship. Therefore, I’d think most of these guys would prefer having a quality team in place rather than having limited payroll commitments. And do you know what would really improve the team’s value? How about a new TV deal that provides this new owner with significant fixed income. That’s going to be nearly impossible if their plan is to cut payroll even further next season. The good news is your theory makes zero sense and I’m 99.9% it will never happen.

If that's true, White Sox should offer JDM 5/$110M and call it a day.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Feb 13, 2018 -> 04:23 PM) Nah, to me his 15-16 looks like the outlier. This year is huge for Machado. If he has an obp in the .310-.330 range again he's not going to get a contract over $200 million What? How do those seasons look like outliers? The kid was 20 to 22 years from 2012 to 2014. He should have been in low A to AA with even an aggressive development curve. To think he'd actually get materially better with more major league seasoning and as his body developed shouldn't be surprising to anyone. And that's exactly what happened. As for 2017, his BABIP was clearly an outlier and roughly 30 points than his worst season ever. He clearly had a bad first half, but part of that was driven by bad luck. Regardless, I don't how you could possibly think his 2015 & 2016 seasons were outliers by any readily available data.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Feb 13, 2018 -> 03:09 PM) Machado's career .329 OBP scares the living crap out of me, as well as that most of his WAR value comes from his defense. His profile doesn't seem like it will age gracefully. Honestly, I'd rather have Moustakas at 5/75 than Machado at 10/350. Way too much risk with Machado. If I were Hahn, next season would be Harper or Bust for me. I'm not sure looking at career stats for a 25 year who is a year away from free agency is fair. Look at his OBP by year: 2012: .294 2013: .314 2014: .324 2015: .359 2016: .343 2017: .310 Clearly there was an adjustment period at the start of his career which makes sense given most kids his age are in A ball. And obviously last year is a clear outlier. A .350 OBP is perfectly fine for a player with his power and that's basically what he was in 2015 & 2016. As for the potential risk of signing Machado, I really think his next contract will include an opt-out after four years or so and that he'll most certainly exercise it. Sure, there is always the chance he becomes the next Jason Heyward, but I just don't see that being remotely possible with Manny. Assuming he rebounds in 2018, I'm all in on signing him to a 10/$350M. Can't be afraid to sign star players entering their prime if we actually want to a win a World Series.