2 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

I've heard this before. Forget where, I want to say Jimmy - but I'm not sure.

Not Cishek, was to be for Madrigal

23 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Why?

 

9 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

Why? They did it with Lynn. Cheap and stupid tends to be this club's MO when not trading off incredibly valuable MLB assets (then they're cheap and smart).

This guy has the right idea. 

 

13 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

 

Adam "Cheesy Beef" Maloney

5 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Trading assets for one year of Bundy would be the definition of insanity.  If you’re trading for another pitcher they better have two or three years of control.

Doesn't it depend on what those assets are?

I would not overpay for him but if he comes cheap, why not?

SO why would the Angels trade Bundy?

1 hour ago, bmags said:

SO why would the Angels trade Bundy?

That’s probably the better question.

13 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

That’s probably the better question.

While they have been rumored in more big splashes than they executed, they made some really great low-key updates to their infield. They don't have a replacement for Bundy, and it's not like we have that Dunning like piece for them to rely on this year.

5 minutes ago, bmags said:

While they have been rumored in more big splashes than they executed, they made some really great low-key updates to their infield. They don't have a replacement for Bundy, and it's not like we have that Dunning like piece for them to rely on this year.

And Minasian said his number one goal was to add starting pitching.  I just don’t see them moving Bundy under any realistic circumstance.

6 hours ago, bmags said:

SO why would the Angels trade Bundy?

Seeing his name attached to the ball doctoring thing in Anaheim could be a reason.

4 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

And Minasian said his number one goal was to add starting pitching.  I just don’t see them moving Bundy under any realistic circumstance.

But it's his walk year. Angels arent winning anything. Why not get an asset or 2 for the future ? Maybe they hang onto him until the trade deadline when they are 10 games under .500 .

2 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

But it's his walk year. Angels arent winning anything. Why not get an asset or 2 for the future ? Maybe they hang onto him until the trade deadline when they are 10 games under .500 .

Hard to imagine the Angels won’t be going for it this year no matter what.

10 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Hard to imagine the Angels won’t be going for it this year no matter what.

If they end up signing Bauer I'll believe that.

1 hour ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

But it's his walk year. Angels arent winning anything. Why not get an asset or 2 for the future ? Maybe they hang onto him until the trade deadline when they are 10 games under .500 .

They absolutely believe they are competing

 

Can we stop with this guy? He's obviously just looking up anything White Sox related and then trying to "report" that he had this info all along too. Half the accounts he retweets are like his. Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. 

 

What player hasn't he said we've been interested in? If we sign one of them (Out of the 64 he's mentioned) he's gonna go "Aha! I was right". 

Edited January 8, 20215 yr by Baron

1 minute ago, Baron said:

Can we stop with this guy? He's obviously just looking up anything White Sox related and then trying to "report" that he had this info all along too. Half the accounts he retweets are like his. Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. 

Not surprising. The hamburgers aren't even in the top ten best things at portillos.

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

Not surprising. The hamburgers aren't even in the top ten best things at portillos.

Not at all. I mean they are good. But I don't go to Portillos for a hamburger. 

3 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Hard to imagine the Angels won’t be going for it this year no matter what.

The Angels always seem to be "going for it."  Their problem seems to be the "being good at baseball" part.  I bet their message boards are fun during the offseasons, though.

5 minutes ago, Baron said:

Not at all. I mean they are good. But I don't go to Portillos for a hamburger. 

I've gone to Portillo's for literally 45 years (my whole life) -- and I've never had a hamburger there. Like, who you crappin?

Just now, longshot7 said:

I've gone to Portillo's for literally 45 years (my whole life) -- and I've never had a hamburger there. Like, who you crappin?

You can have one after 2 beef sandwiches right? 

The hamburgers are good, idiots.

3 minutes ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

The Angels always seem to be "going for it."  Their problem seems to be the "being good at baseball" part.  I bet their message boards are fun during the offseasons, though.

They don't have fans, like we would think of, so it's not the same. Their fanbase doesn't care.

Just now, bmags said:

The hamburgers are good, idiots.

They might be, but with those hot dogs I'm never getting anything besides that so who cares what else they have on the menu??

1 minute ago, longshot7 said:

They don't have fans, like we would think of, so it's not the same. Their fanbase doesn't care.

I dunno, I know a few of them, and they still haven't gotten over the 2005 ALCS ?