hogan873

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Feb 21, 2018 -> 07:59 AM) You could probably look at the twenty previous 45th or 49th pick and find a bunch of guys who never made it. I’m not necessarily advocating the signing of Moustakas but it sure as hell would have nothing to do with that pick. Yeah, this is a tough one. I would hazard to guess that if you looked at the success rate of the 45th to 49th picks it wouldn't be overwhelming. History would tell us that there are potential gems in every round (see Mark Buehrle). Obviously a 45th pick would have a better CHANCE at success than a 145th pick. I suppose it comes down to what sort of deal Moustakas could be signed for. If he would sign for 5/$60ish, it might be worth it. People smarter than me would be making the decision ultimately. The potential loss of the pick will be considered along with many other factors (free agent availability and the chances the Sox have of signing them chief among them).

Just finished La Mante on Netflix. It's an excellent French thriller. Only six episodes, so the storytelling is tight.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 02:21 PM) If our scouts were right about Rutherford then at some point he's going to be a breakout player. If they were wrong, then someone screwed up badly because that was a pretty major mistake, to like the guy in the draft, pay a high trade price for him in a trade, and then not get a big league player out of it. They clearly like this guy, so if they're wrong, that should be one of those "how were we this badly wrong" moments where you change your scouts or change the evaluation tools that led you to that guy. For his prospect ranking at the time that was a fair price, but you would have to hope that they were doing slightly more diligence on these guys than saying "What is their ranking in the MLB.com prospects list right now and is that fair for what we're giving up?" Yes. A good organization would definitely do some sort of failure analysis if a guy the scouts really liked flops.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 10:05 AM) You're being too kind to Sox brass on that trade. Sox should have gotten a lot more from Yanks. I disagree. Like I said, the real value of that trade was Kahnle. Robertson was good but was still owed a lot of money, and Frazier was...well, Todd Frazier. Time will tell with Rutherford and even Tito Polo. Maybe the Sox could have gotten a little more, but definitely not a lot more.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 9, 2018 -> 08:41 AM) With the possible exception of selling low on Robertson/Kahnle/Frazier... Possibly. I think the biggest issue with that trade was that the Sox could have gotten a better return for Kahnle. But with Frazier and Robertson attached, it didn't really add anything. If Rutherford improves and is close to being the player it was once thought he would be, it'll look like a good trade.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Feb 7, 2018 -> 07:08 PM) I should probably quit getting so worked up over my perceived slights of Avi. Even if he loses he gets $5.85 mill this year. If he can't live off one year's salary the rest of his life (even after taxes and agent fees) he's screwing up somewhere. He's a rich, rich man for life. These guys have every right to get as much money as they can each year. It's not exactly like football players who could suffer a career ending injury at any time, but there are still risks. Plus, if a guy like Avi loses arbitration and ends up tanking, his chances of getting paid afterwards go down. That extra million could make a difference. Look, I get the thought process of "give me $5.85 million and I'd be happier than s***." And like all other professional sports, they are all overpaid. But that doesn't matter. We can't compare what we get paid vs. what they get paid. The players look at what other players are getting paid and base what they expect on that. Teams pay out $80, $100, $200 million a year, and these guys are looking to get their cut.

There are so many guys that haven't been signed that I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox end up signing a guy for a year with the intention of possibly trading him at the deadline.

Finished The Handmaid's Tale last night. Excellent but infuriating. Looking forward to season 2 in April.

MLB will probably have to change the rules. They'll make home runs for the opposing teams worth 2 times what they normally would be. Sox pitchers would have to stand on a mound that is 90 feet from home plate. Opposing hitters would be allowed to use aluminum bats. The Sox would only be allowed to have two outfielders. And even then, Sox opponents would occasionally forfeit just to avoid the embarrassment.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Jan 18, 2018 -> 03:27 PM) If you don't mind supernatural elements Dark on Netflix is a pretty crazy ride (it's better if you go in knowing nothing about it) Dark was fantastic. I've seen it described as a more adult Stranger Things, but aside from some early similarities, it's really something different.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Jan 12, 2018 -> 09:08 AM) This thread is Greg's masterpiece. His Mona Lisa Yeah, this thread needs to be tagged as classic.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 11, 2018 -> 01:41 PM) Miguel is OK by me. How were his peripherals before I decide whether he's good or not. I don't despise him or anything. As far as Shields/Opening Day. Geez. If he pitches Opening Day it's telling the world and our fans: "The White Sox wish to tank one more season. Please bear with us as we tank. And please enjoy your 25 dollar parking and 10 dollar beer. We are allowed to charge that while giving you James Shields one more season before we get good. That is all." Don't wreck another thread with comments about peripherals, please. I think every fan (every informed fan, anyway) is aware that the Sox are not planning on competing this year. Who they roll out there on opening day doesn't really matter. And parking is $20. It's $10 if you go on Sunday. Tickets are still relatively cheap, especially if you buy them second-hand (SeatGeek, Vivid Seats, etc.) As far as beer and food? You can bring your own water and food in clear containers. I always buy a beer or two, but we bring water and snacks for the kids. And yes, they are allowed to charge what they do...all teams do, regardless of the product on the field.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 11, 2018 -> 11:08 AM) Somewhat surprised he is getting a major league deal as well, but hard to be that upset when we need veteran stability in the rotation. Does Covey get cut? Pardon my ignorance, but can he be cut since he was a Rule 5 last year? I'm not sure how that works.

$4.75 million. Not terrible. I feel mildly better about the 5th spot.

I'm okay with this. Better than Covey. Is this a minor league deal?

QUOTE (mac9001 @ Jan 10, 2018 -> 10:40 PM) It would make for good TV if they just randomly throw a new guy out there every 5th day. You know...that sounds like a good marketing plan. Have a fan lottery where they can bid to pitch an inning for the Sox. Every fifth day they would just roll out a string of fans to throw an inning at a time. Line up 5-10 fans per game to cover the first five innings. Have the bullpen cover the rest.

I think what's lost in the argument over how bad Soria really is is the fact that this was a pretty damn good trade. I think we should be less concerned with Soria and more pleased about Avilan. That guy definitely fills a hole in the bullpen, and he could be worth a decent return at the deadline. Soria still fills a hole, and he could be an effective late inning guy if he bounces back a bit. By June, Greg and the residents of Kansas City could be singing "I told you so", or others will be saying, "See, he's not that bad!". I imagine, however, there will be a lot of people saying "Meh." On a team not expected to compete, "Meh" will probably be good enough.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 02:40 PM) Right, I have no problem with the trade, but a lot of people got their panties in a bunch when Greg called a spade a spade and said Soria isn't so good. So talk about arguing a small point just because. I doubt anyone will give him credit when he turns out to be correct. It will just be of course he wasn't any good, that wasn't the point of the deal... Well, to be fair, Greg didn't say Soria isn't so good. He said he's awful, essentially one of the worst pitchers the Royals had, and apparently a really bad guy. Kansas City (the city) is rejoicing because he was traded. That's why folks have "their panties in a bunch".

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 11:42 AM) Geez. I'm just trying to add some context here. I live here and I'm just relaying the relief of Royals fans getting rid of Soria. He was the whipping boy of fans all last year (much like me despising Dunn that one year and me despising Rios, etc) and the talk shows are blazing. Do you guys check Twitter? Type in Soria's name for gosh sakes. I don't like being negative Nancy but I'm just passing along what I KNOW from living here. Soria was booed; Soria was despised; Soria was a bad clubhouse guy; Soria was the scapegoat for all the Royals' bullpen woes. Soria will make me consider whether to buy mlb.com this year cause he will drive me insane UNLESS as I pointed out Coop fixes him. I also said the other reliever we got sounds fine. Read my posts before you guys say I'm totally out of line. Don't you want info passed on? We can't be Sox shills all the time for gosh sakes. Be reasonable. He's awful; Coop easily could fix him. He's so bad greg doesn't want to watch him pitch on mlb.com in a Sox uniform so shoot me. You guys over-react. Read my tweets; they are not that negative since I do bring up Coop. This goes both ways. Some of our players get trashed on here. Like take away two weeks of a hitter's 0 for 30 and the hitter is different. Look, I get it. Sox fans are excited cause he's new, the unknown. I'd love if Soria does what some relievers do and has a good year after a bad one. You are extremely negative about Soria. Like he did something to you personally. Look at his stats, both traditional and advanced. He's not bad. He's better than Covey and Farquar. He fills a hole that the Sox needed to fill. The bullpen is a mess, and Soria makes it better. Is he overpaid? Yes, most likely. Does that really matter? Not right now. This was a very good trade. It's not like the Sox gave up a top prospect or someone from the MLB roster. If the Sox acquiring Soria makes you not want to watch them, that's...odd. It just seems like your dislike for this guy is misguided.

I don't see anything to complain about this trade. Soria could be a trade candidate at the deadline, and at worst they buy him out after the season. Avilan seems to be a fairly intriguing piece. A solid lefty out of the pen, which the Sox need. He'll be fairly cheap, as well. Oh, and there's the $4 million. Hahn picked up a couple arms for the bullpen, and I think we can all agree that the bullpen needed some help. A little money was sent our way. And the Sox really didn't give up much. Nice job.

Dark on Netflix is really good. It's in German, but the subtitles are easy to follow. It starts off a little like Stranger Things but then goes off in a totally different direction.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 29, 2017 -> 10:38 AM) I've felt for a month now Yelich will end up here along with Prado. It will clearly require a huge package and think it will be something like Hansen, Collins and Rutherford. Sign me up for that That package seems a little light, but taking on Prado's contract should give them some flexibility. I wouldn't be upset over a deal like that.

Just finished Wormwood on Netflix. Fascinating story of the CIA experimenting on their own people with LSD.

QUOTE (GenericUserName @ Dec 22, 2017 -> 10:02 AM) I would say we might be able to decrease the price if we take on a bad contract. Maybe the reason we haven't done that with Kemp or Ellsbury yet is because that is our plan with the Marlins. Who might they try to dump with a bad contract?

I see Yelich costing considerably more than the Sox (or the fans) would be willing to part with.