Jerksticks

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 7, 2017 -> 01:48 AM) If you dont understand the difference between corruption and foreign states trying to manipulate their enemy, I really dont see the point in having the discussion. Last I checked Citigroup didnt invade Ukraine recently. Honestly, Russia is probably laughing about how easy it was. Internet reinvented propaganda. Oh I get it and Russia is laughing just like it's been laughing for years at us now. I was referring to the fact that the emails still existed whether Russia or my mom leaked them. Aren't you glad they were leaked? I feel like even the weird radical leftists (who would tend to support Bernie's super-progressivist ideas) would be happy. These are the people who typically supported Asange & Snowden before they helped Trump, & typically hate the idea of big corporate greed funding campaigns. I can address my personal thoughts on US/Russia in a different post but I think the point here is that blaming the messenger to avoid the message is weird. Let's take the example further- what if the emails proved Hillary say... had some people killed. Would you still only be mad at Russia for proving it true, and still vote for her? Or would you be thankful the corruption was unearthed?

I guess I don't understand the uproar over any of the Russian election stuff, particularly that the election shouldn't be valid because of it. I mean, I found it interesting as hell and super disturbing at the same time that Bernie never had a chance. Or that Citigroup picked Obama's cabinet for him basically. Or that Hillary was getting debate questions abead of time. Or that the media was asking for Hillary's approval for stories. Or even O'Keefe uncovering the bird-dogging etc. Blame the messenger all you want, but the real story is the corruption. I'm happy for the American people that some of the stink got exposed finally. All because some people were sloppy being stinky.

I want 2017 to be a total tank for Beer/#1 pick. But more importantly, the Sox could have a roster of mostly Sox prospects pre-trades. Finally have the opportunity to see if some of our guys are some hidden gems. 1B- Abreu 2B- Saladino SS- Anderson 3B- Davidson/Delmonico DH- Avi/Davidson/Delmonico C- Narvaez/Smith OF- Engel OF- Tilson OF- May OF- Coats IF- Alvarez IF- Hayes IF- Peter More or less that until the break.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 10:35 PM) A deep stable of interesting young arms gets you third place. Agreed. I think the Astros are in trouble as is. Their offense wasn't too good last year &they beefed it up, but that SP is not even close to championship caliber. Does their bullpen blow chunks too? No idea who they have in there. Good job Hahn if you convince the Astros all they need is Q to compete with the Red Sox etc.

Can we remerge the Quintana threads if the combined total nears Soxtalk's biggest thread?

If we live in fantasy land for a minute more...I think Meadows would be great but Bregman would be absolutely badass. I think cashing in Q on an infielder is wiser than an outfielder. More risk of injury out there.

If the Rangers sign Ross & Napoli that could pressure the Astros a bit more. Winning the division is by no means in the bag for the Astros. I think Q/Frazier makes them a way better team.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 06:31 PM) Q is worth those guys + but doesn't mean their teams will trade them. That said, I don't think anyone is ever untouchable. Maybe the 'Stros don't want to include Bregman but that could change, same with Meadows and anyone else. There's no reason for posters to keep yelling that "Bregman wont be traded" every time he gets mentioned. No one knows if that's true or not. Exactly. That's my point as well. If the Astros believe they have to keep Bregman then it's hard to find a deal that will help the Sox. Sure we can get those quantity packages but that's super risky for the Sox. If you're trading an allstar on a cheap contract NOW, then the idea is to get at least two guys who will be Allstars LATER. Bregman, like Moncada, is as sure a thing as you can hope for with prospects. But since developing prospects aren't sure allstars like Q already is, we need more prospects as well. Not getting Bregman means the Sox take on an overwhelming amount of risk with wildcards like Tucker, Martes etc- guys you hope become above average. Really think the Sox gotta hold their ground for a "sure thing" (prospect-wise) guy as the headliner. One more Moncada and we are sitting super pretty

So if Q and his contract aren't worth a prospect like Bregman or Meadows...then who is? I always thought you had to trade more prospects for an allstar MLB player. Apparently now you have to trade more MLB players for one untouchable prospect? GMAFB. Chris Sale was worth the absolute #1 prospect plus three other really good prospects. Jose Quintana can get Bregman+ Jose Quintana can get Meadows+ It's not even a debate. It's just going to have to hurt if you're the Astros or Pirates. That's how trading for Allstar pitchers with legendary contracts works.

I like the Bregman+ package for frazier/q because it fits our needs better. That gives us a potentially fully Allstar infield in a couple years with potential MVP candidates. We already have depth in our outfield and pitching prospects. Plus the ability to run after a Harper to fill an outfield gap. Or maybe we forego that route and go after machado to solidy the allstar infield and target Meadows with Q.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 03:14 AM) Im in Cambodia. Very hot here. Wtf are you doing there?? That's badass. What are some interesting things about Cambodia most wouldn't know?

QUOTE (heirdog @ Jan 5, 2017 -> 05:48 PM) I think the white sox are adamant that Bregman is included. And it is Bregman who is the "MLB" piece that Luhnow balked at not Musgrove. Outside of getting a longer shot in the bigs last year, Bregman is no different than a Moncada level player that we got for Sale. And everything we heard is that Hahn wants a Sale type return for Q (albeit w likely more position players than pitchers). So I think Bregman/tucker is the ask similar to Moncada/Kopech and the last couple pieces will be negotiated fairly quickly if Luhnow comes around to the first two. I agree completely. I think Hahn is being pretty firm that it's Bregman+ or no deal, as he rightfully should be saying. How can you trade an Allstar innings-eater on a peanuts deal for tablescrap prospects like Tucker/Martes as a headliner. What an absolute joke of a trade that would be.

Maybe because there's not much superstar potential in that group. Archer is one click away from full-blown superstar pitcher.

Wow the thread title made me think he was out for another year with another surgery. Glad he's progressing well.

Did the old Q thread set the record here?

Dude, there are big national broadcasts and then there are local broadcasts. The national broadcasts need the unbiased guys to reach a universal audience. Sox games, for example, are broadcasted on CSNChi, WCIU & WGN for the most part. In other words, greater Chicagoland ONLY. The job of the announcers is to attract the viewers to tune in and watch their team. The only people who watch broadcasts like these are local fans, or local people who they hope become fans. The goal of the broadcasts isn't unbiased journalism, it's to keep fans and create fans so they spend money on the team & the sponsors advertising. A person can dislike Hawk for any number of reasons, but he's a fan of baseball and a student of the game. He almost always compliments the other team more than the Sox because he is just a fan of good baseball. But he roots for the Sox as he should, just like all local announcers root for their local teams. Disliking him is fine, but disliking him for promoting the Sox to the local viewrs (fans) is an incorrect reason. It's flat out wrong and sounds haughty (not at all saying that's you by the way, just people on the high horse about unbiased announcing). His #1 job is to be a fan of the Sox. Thinking otherwise is completely incorrect.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2017 -> 03:42 PM) Oh god, impartiality with sports announcers, who cares. "Hey man, I'm impressionable, you can't tell me your opinion about a game let me form my own opinion so I can make crucial decisions off of it" Yes. The whole snobby "a TRUE broadcaster does this..." attitude should get flushed down the toilet forever. Shame on anybody knocking what every local broadcaster does: call games for the team's fans. Absolutely self-righteous and annoying. Should they stop selling White Sox gear at the stadium too? Don't want to influence the visiting fans' kids. Don't want to ram such a life-altering bias down these kids' throats. #hawkling

If only they made a Hawk Harrelson brand popsicle. It would be a nice summer treat for his detractors to suck on. At least they could enjoy his sweet flavors a different way.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 1, 2017 -> 04:29 PM) As far as I know there has been zero reporting or even whispers that Meadows is untouchable. I could be wrong though. Re: Glasnow The reality with Glasnow is if he walks 5 batters per 9 innings he will not be a starter. If the Sox dont think the control issues can be corrected then he's destined for the bullpen and he's not a headline piece. With Giolito they obviously recognized the Nationals bungling and they have confidence Kopech and Dunning can be developed. If the scouts and coaches are telling Rick Hahn that Glasnow is not a fit unless he's on the back end of the deal he will listen to them, not the general consensus from Baseball America. Love the last sentence. My thoughts exactly.

LF Pods CF 1 Dog RF Maggs 3B Crede SS Valentin 2B Sweet Baby Ray 1B Paulie C AJ DH Hurt SP Sale SP Buehrle SP Jack SP Contreras SP James Baldwin RP Biddle RP Sisco RP Aaaardsma RP Schoenweiss RP Foulke RP Jenks Bench TCQ, BA, Charles Johnson, Norton, Saladino Manager Ozzie I know coop is better but i miss watching the body shape of Nardi walking out there. Wallace Johnson 3B coach Baines was my favorite as a kid but man he seems so boring as an adult.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jan 1, 2017 -> 01:57 PM) (1) It's not just BA's rankings. (2) These scouting services' rankings are based talking to scouts and coaches in the various leagues. (3) I never said a deal had to be made using prospect rankings. My only point is that a consensus top-10 prospect in all of baseball is not a third piece. For sure and i wasn't coming after you. My point is that Glasnow could be a third piece to the Sox if they don't like him. This is totally logical because the Pirates have played their hand by trying to replace him with Quintana. The idea of being excited by getting Glasnow as the first or second piece is a terrifying proposition to us as Sox fans. Most of us would not be excited to get Glasnow as the first or second piece, and rightfully so. So yes, he would be a terrific third piece. Second is an arguable stretch and first is a freaking nightmare. Absolute nightmare.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jan 1, 2017 -> 01:27 PM) A consensus top-10 prospect in baseball is a third piece? I see. So Rick or any GMs are only allowed to make trades that value players using BA rankings. Rick: We don't like Glasnow Hutch: Neither do we, that's why we want Quintana Rick: Exactly so give us Meadows. Hutch: But Glasnow is top 10. You're getting fair value. Rick: Yea but he sucks. Hutch: So? Top 10. It's fair. Rick: Yea but he looks timid out there, MLB players lit him up AND he has no control. Hutch: That's why we don't want him Rick: Then why do you think you can get Quintana for him? Hutch: Look at his prospect ranking. Fair value. You're not allowed to disagree. Message board rules Rick: Silly me. I always forget.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 01:10 PM) The worry with Glasnow remains control. His stuff is serious, his K-rate is serious, but he has one truly substantial issue in that he has more 1 walk every 2 innings or more at basically every one of his minor league stops. That's comparable to Fulmer last year or Rodon as a rookie and almost 3 times the rate of Chris Sale. There's no reason for me to say that he can't improve upon that, but that's because I'm not a major league scout. What I will say is that if you're down on him, it's because your organization believes he will struggle to make progress on that issue. So, there is reason to at least be hesitant on him, if you think that is a problem you can't solve. If you think that's a problem you can solve, go for it. Exactly. Those that defend Glasnow have absolutely no right to discredit the other opinion on him. The fact is over 5-some years he has never come remotely close to controlling his stuff. Never. Maybe he becomes an effectively wild guy like Zambrano. Maybe he harnesses it. Maybe MLB hitters chew him up some more. Either way, Rick Hahn would be a fool to trade the most valuable pitching asset in baseball for a package headlined by Glasnow. Good job so far Rick.

Penis 4582

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 08:51 PM) I get it, but with as young of a rotation as we'll be running the next 2 years I think there's a solid case for spending money on a veteran at that position too. Very true. How are the receiving skills for these two top 500 prospect catchers? I don't remember Narvaez pissing me off much