shysocks

If I leave a game without getting a brat with grilled onions, something has gone wrong. Like, notify-my-family wrong.

QUOTE (GREEDY @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 01:20 PM) "No using small sample sizes to make your point".... "Here is a a small sample size to prove your point wrong". More like "We have just as much of a sample saying Eaton is good against lefties as the one saying he is bad so let's not write him off as a platoon player."

QUOTE (GREEDY @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 01:03 PM) Eaton is a poor offensive player (.291 wOBA, .054 ISO) vs LHP and a below average defender. In a perfect world he doesn't start vs LHP. How is that nonsense? That's one year of splits based on a couple hundred plate appearances. In 2014, he was more than capable against lefties (110 wRC+). In a perfect world nobody would start against their weak hand, but in the real world there's limited roster space. Eaton isn't a platoon guy at this point.

Posting this strictly because it's hilarious. Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 4h4 hours ago Mark Buehrle, who turned down chances, isn't quite ready to announce retirement. But he isn't throwing, recently bought an RV

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Feb 14, 2016 -> 01:52 PM) I honestly havent met a single person who says Obamacare has helped them. Mostly you hear people complaining that their job cut their hours or that peoples premiums have went up. People's premiums were going up anyway. My mother-in-law is a diabetic who deals with many of the complications that come from that, and when she got laid off around 2009 she lost her insurance. She went into serious debt from having to pay for her medicine herself and could not pay many of her bills. There is still debt now, but at least she is insured. On the flip side, when I worked for a health insurance company when the Affordable Care Act passed, some of my coworkers were let go to cut expenses because of the minimum loss ratio portion of the law. I do know that company touted itself as one of the "more prepared" for the new law, so this may have been reactionary. I left that company shortly thereafter so I don't know if they ever beefed up the payroll again. So I'd say I have more anecdotal experience with the ACA than many others. I had friends who got fired because of the law, as well as a family member who was able to get insurance and, it is not a stretch to say, may actually be alive today because of the law. I have to call that a net positive.

What you guys gloss over is that the team picked a direction when they traded for Frazier, and so far they've been unable to finish the job. If they weren't comfortable with the costs it would take to make this team a real contender, then they should have noticed the deals teams like Atlanta were making and torn it down. I'm not just b****ing because I'm dumb and believed all the tweets and now they won't sign all the free agents I want. I'm mad because we've traded away a bunch of assets to become a .500 team.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 12:21 PM) They made serious bids on both Gordon and Cespedes. Clearly not too stubborn to address it. Just haven't yet addressed it successfully. Semantics. Either they were too stubborn to address it, or they misunderstood the market and their capacity to take advantage of it. In both cases it's a failure with the same end result: Avisail Garcia having a prominent role on the team again. So ever since Soxfest they've been feeding us the same fluffy garbage that we heard year after year about Beckham and Viciedo. I will continue to hope that we find a replacement before the season starts. Failing that, I will root for Garcia and hope that he proves everybody wrong and simultaneously learns how to hit, field, and run at a major league level. But this has been a failure and it rightfully casts a shadow over the rest of the moves of the offseason - good, productive moves in their own right. Because this team had a very easy, obvious hole to fill. One more thing that clearly needed fixing, and they couldn't do it. And now I have to hear about how Avi Garcia is in the Best Shape Of His LifeTM again. I mean my god, how stupid do they think we are? Sorry. This rant was a long time coming and it's not aimed at you, HH.

QUOTE (Saufley @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 11:54 AM) Your point in rebuttal to mine is???? At this point, Desmond and his agent should be selling himself on his willingness to play all positions. I mean, you asked why people are mentioning Desmond in the OF, and he told you. That's all.

The talking up of Avi continues. He's gonna be the starting right fielder and I'm gonna lose my freaking mind. Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 8m8 minutes ago Todd Steverson said Avisail Garcia was very receptive to trying a new stance when they worked out for 3 days in Miami. Promises diff. look. Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 7m7 minutes ago Todd Steverson on Avisail Garcia: "“You can tell people, tell people, tell people. But until they get a hold of it in their own head." Dan Hayes ‏@CSNHayes 3m3 minutes ago Basically, #WhiteSox know there's much to be done & it's early. They're hoping Avisail Garcia gets comfy w/ new stance in spring.

Desmond's hitting trends just make me really nervous. Every year since his breakout it's just been a creeping decline in every facet. 2012: .292/.335/.511 2013: .280/.331/.453 2014: .255/.313/.430 2015: .233/.290/.384 Do not like. I know he doesn't have to be an all-star to provide value at the prices we're talking, but I just feel like he isn't done tumbling.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 09:39 AM) Isn't Lawrie just here for one year? Anderson would play 2B in 2017. I don't think he'll be good enough defensively as a SS. 2018 free agent assuming he doesn't play/a-hole his way out after one season.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 08:46 AM) I would think most high schools have the prospects to trade for Bruce. Yeah, I don't get the wording about prospects in these Bruce tweets. Cinci should be giving him away for free.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 07:45 AM) At 2 years/$20 million, I'll give up the draft pick for a guy like Fowler without a second thought. Agreed, that would be a clear win.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 10, 2016 -> 07:59 AM) When you write an article about who the Royals biggest challengers are and you refer to the Royals as "us" your opinion has lost all credibility. And why would anybody here give a f*** who a Royals homer, wanna-be writer thinks the Royals biggest challengers are? And why is it posted in a thread about Ian Desmond and Austin Jackson. And as far as the poll at the end, it is on a Royals fan website. The readers are Royals fans. Would Royals fan give any credibility to a poll on Soxtalk. I highly doubt it. Seconded. All of it. Sometimes - read, sometimes - caulfield's Royals tangents are partially sort of defensible and in the flow of conversation. This was just completely out of nowhere. Abjectly f***ing irritating.

He's a guy. Notable career platoon splits. 95 wRC+ vs right, 60 vs left.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) Risk involves chance of losing something. In this case, there isn't much risk. Even if he sucks, he can easily be cut and at no real loss to the team. "Even if I lose the lottery, I just throw the ticket away at no real loss to my bank account." But a lottery ticket is definitively a high-risk purchase. Again, risk =/= price. I don't really know how else to say but I'm gonna drop it for now.

Do not confuse risk with price. Risk =/= Price. They're associated, but you also have to factor in the likelihood of different levels of performance. A lottery ticket - a literal, actual lottery ticket - is high risk/high reward because even though it only costs a dollar, there is an overwhelmingly high chance of losing. The potential gain is great. Latos is closer to a lottery ticket than, I dunno, keeping your money under the mattress (which is low risk/low reward). Didn't mean to derail the thread, but I think the chances of Latos being a dud are greater than people are admitting.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:24 PM) There is no such thing as low risk / high reward. Please stop it. You can say it is a low-risk signing, because it is. It's only 1/$3M. But the concept is high risk / high reward or low risk / low reward, because risk isn't about what happened in the end. It's about the chances of something happening in the future. If there is a high chance of a high reward, that person isn't signing for $3M. It is also about the LIKELY reward, since obviously ANY investment could go big or go bad. Same in baseball as any other investment. So this is low risk / low reward. And that's fine. Now go get a bloody right fielder. Haha, think we said the opposite thing in the same way. It comes down to odds.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 01:20 PM) Why is low risk/high reward impossible? We're not talking about trading equities here. Latos is a guy who has consistently been a 3+ WAR pitcher when healthy (and only 28 years old) that can be released for a total of $3M if things go south. I'm not sure what else you would call this signing other than low risk/high reward. It's high risk. There's a good chance he'll be banged up or ineffective. If the chances of him being healthy/good were higher, he would have signed for more than $3M.

Using this as an excuse to trade Erik Johnson would be a mistake. Again I ask, how many innings can you realistically rely on Latos to pitch? This move was to bolster pitching depth. And people, please stop calling things low risk/high reward. Low risk/high reward is impossible. You make me cranky.

Best case: A Gavin Floyd-like season. Worst case: Gives us 8 or 9 garbage starts, punches a fan in the parking lot, released. A worthwhile gamble.

Damn, hard to argue with that price. How many innings can he be counted on?

Then gimme 2001 Magglio and 2003 Loaiza.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Feb 9, 2016 -> 10:12 AM) Fangraphs suggests Gallardo for us http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/yovani-gall...re-obvious-fit/ He makes an all right case, but a couple things stuck out to me. They’ve been tied to Fowler because they badly need an outfielder, too, but I’d argue the rotation is where an upgrade is more dire. I'd argue you're wrong, dude. Outfield is where the resources need to go. If my choices are the rotation or nothing, then upgrade the rotation, I guess. There’s only one safe, durable pitcher left on the market, and durable and safe is all the White Sox need. Sure. Gallardo is as safe and durable as a 30-year-old pitcher whose K% has dropped in six consecutive seasons gets.

So are we assuming you're just putting them in a time machine and making them play the 2016 season? ie Honus Wagner is great an all, but he might not make it against today's pitching. Or do we just get to copy + paste their stats from that season into our lineup? Think you have to go with an outfielder and a starting pitcher. Might be fun to have an all-time fantastic shortstop instead of the pitcher, but the peace of mind from - barring injury - not having to rely on both EJ and Danks pays off more, I think. 2002 Vlad Guerrero: .336/.417/.593, 39 HR, 40 SB. Last year of Vlad's career before he lost a step and became a defensive liability. 2001 Randy Johnson: I'm taking a lefty because damn if the possibility of having 4 dominant lefties isn't awesome.