Reddy

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 11:40 AM) Why would you want to sign Shark long term if you think he's overvalued? Because he's still a very useful piece, and since Sale is so damn cheap right now, it's fine if we waste a little on having someone around who can anchor a rotation and eat innings with a decent era. In my mind, this year sets us up to be a really great team in '16.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 11:43 AM) Fangraphs and others seems to not, a lot, so no. Let's not pretend to know more than we really do here, folks. Could go any which way, but 90 is nothing close to approaching crazy. Not even a stretch. 90 wins is absolutely a stretch. EVERY SINGLE PROJECTIONS SYSTEM has the sox in the upper 70s.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 11:28 AM) I think they're a 90 win team as constituted , with a likely better roster by season's end IF we don't fall flat out of the gate. 90 gets you in almost every time - that's a contender. The projections are a joke. Lumping Abreu in with other "sophomores" regression profiles is the first place they go off the rails. BP loves Abreu. So... there goes that argument. He's likely to regress a LITTLE bit. That's just the way baseball works. They're simply not a 90 win team unless everything goes right, like in '05. Garcia, Gillaspie, Sanchez and Flowers are four HUGE issues (like I said, we don't know what we're gonna get from Avi) and the back end of the rotation is bad. Teams don't just improve 17 wins over a previous season. It doesn't happen except on very, very rare occasions. I also think everyone on this board overvalues Shark. I see him as a high 3s ERA guy, definitely our third best starter. I wouldn't completely be shocked with a very low 4s era in the AL in this park. Also, this is based on a lot of the projection systems out there and his past production. There are too many question marks to assume they'll win 90 games, but I'm still really excited about the season because they'll be competitive all year long, and if they can show they're competitive, they're more likely to keep Shark long term.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:53 AM) 3 black holes? I see 2B and C (with guys who can be non-terrible hitters in house). What's your third? Avi is a huge, huge question mark. He could be great or utter crap.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:51 AM) Expecting wins in the high 90s is a little crazy, but unless you're the Dodgers or Nationals, expecting to win 90+ games is a little crazy for any team in the majors right now. There are going to be more than two 90 wins teams. Those win totals are almost certainly based on projected WARs for the individual players on the team, and projection systems have been bearish on the current version of the White Sox, and to some extent, there's reason for that. The team isn't particularly deep, there's older talent on the roster, it's not that strong defensively, and there are quite a few players who are at risk of regressing (the two that come to mind are Ramirez and Flowers initially, though you can make a case for a ton of guys). It's a good team though, and you don't have to squint to see how they could be a contender (like you have in previous seasons). The keys for me are: -Avisail Garcia having a good year (2 WAR would be a nice start) -Adam Eaton stays healthy enough to play 140 games. -Conor Gillaspie keeps hitting righties well -SOMEONE forms a viable platoon at 3B with Gillaspie (between Bonifacio, Beckham, and Saladino) -the bullpen is good -a legitimate 4th starter steps up -the Sox get positive production out of 2B and C These are aside from things that we already expect - the top 3 is very good, those guys expected to perform do so and stay healthy, et cetera, et cetera. The error bars on those projected win totals are incredibly large as well. 85 wins would put the Sox right in the thick of things until the end of September, and I'd be perfectly content with that sort of season. They give us some basis of projection, but they shouldn't be taken literally. They just give us the median outcome of what we should expect given the information we have. The information we do not have is the outcomes of the 162 game schedule coming up from April through September. I'd be ecstatic with a 2 WAR out of Avisail

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:45 AM) Is this where i can say "I guess I didnt realize that you know more than the folks in the front office"? Who have said that Robin's on the hot seat? Huh. Must have missed that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:42 AM) 85 feels right as a solid median number to me. I don't see us winning this year, but I see us competing, and coming close... sort of like 2012. agreed

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:40 AM) I don't know why people are unwilling to say this team should win the division. If it doesn't contend, Robin definitely should be on the hot seat. If it continues to suck in division play, etc., something's wrong. Team on paper has contender written all over it. It has "competitive" written all over it. Not contender. We have a s***-tastic back end of the rotation and three black holes in the lineup. I also wouldn't be surprised at a high 3's ERA out of Shark.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:30 AM) In the end their predictions are just predictions just like anyone else's. and they TEND to be more accurate than anyone else's.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:36 AM) i wasnt aware that they were an infallible prediction machine. IIRC dont the Sox historically outperform PECOTA predictions? You didn't read my first post. I literally said the Sox outperform PECOTA by an avg of 7 wins per year, which, if it continued, would put us at 85 wins. We'd then still need a lot of things to go right to reach the upper 80s-90 wins. That's asking a lot. My point being, if we don't make the playoffs, but are competitive, Robin's not getting fired.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 09:29 AM) I think your predictions is off base. With the additions I do see an upper 80's win total. They're not my predictions, they're PECOTA. But yeah I'm sure you know better than the folks at baseball prospectus....

I'm optimistic about the team and this year. Totally. But that said, those of you thinking about upper 80s to 90 wins are - in my mind - completely out of touch with reality. BP is projecting 78 wins, and while we usually beat PECOTA by an average of 7 wins/season, that STILL only puts us at 85 wins. Things would have to swing astronomically in the right direction for us to be in the playoff picture. 5 more wins is a lot to get out of this lineup/pitching staff. Not impossible - it happened in '05 - but unlikely. I don't think there's any world in which Robin gets fired this year UNLESS the team does worse than last year, which I also don't see happening. Side note. Gordon Beckham is a better baseball player than Emilio Bonafacio, so in that regard, I like the move.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 12:54 AM) It's def Robin's make or break year IMO. If he doesn't do SABER style things like play the platoon advantage (backed up by splits, not just some gut feeling) then he's going to be second guess both in the media and the FO imo. Hahn doesn't seem like he's expecting anything other than 85-90 wins this year. If Robin doesn't deliver the axe will fall, as it should, again, imo. I don't think any of this is true.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 05:58 PM) Does that include offense? Yes. Would you be happy if I said I "slightly" exaggerated? I'm prone to that. Most people just tune it out.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 04:55 PM) Seriously? Over his career he's amassed a bit over 8 WAR and was paid about 9MM total. That's good value.

for the record, when we had Beckham and were paying him $5mill, he was easily worth that on defense alone. I'm not saying I'm a fan of the move, but he had value when he was here.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 10:51 AM) It's not like there aren't other benefits provided by the government to students: pretty favorable lending, tax deductions of interest on the loans, continuing education credits, etc. Income-based Repayment.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) Wow. Possibly the most liberal poster in here likes a flat tax? Kinda surprised. You may not be aware, but the (primary) argument against a flat tax is that it functions as regressive due to the difference between necessities and everything else. The lower someone's income, the larger percentage goes to true needs - food, clothing, housing, utilities for example. So if the tax rate is flat, that means the tax burden is actually greater on those of lower income. There are ways to combat that of course while still having a flat tax - exemption on income below a certain level (the Forbes model if you will), changes in sales tax structure to lower or remove it for store-bought food and some other necessities. Not agreeing or disagreeing by the way, just was curious if you thought it through. I don't know about that. I went on an anti-muslim rant just a few days back! And I've consistently hated on Obama up until the last few weeks! And yes, I did mention having caveats for the lowest income folks, but outside of that, from middle class on up, I do support a flat tax as long as the fuggin' loopholes are closed for the wealthiest Americans.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 28, 2015 -> 10:22 AM) It is punishment, and I also said raise taxes on the rich in other areas if you really want to even out the benefit. I like to reward good behavior (saving long term for something). Not just give people things because (going to school). Unless it's MY good behavior I guess! (and encouraging people to go to school by making it affordable is how you grow the middle class and help put a dent in poverty, which are good things)

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 08:00 PM) I support a proportionate tax. I am just surprised you are supporting it. yeah, I definitely don't think the rich should pay proportionally MORE than everyone else, so I agree with you re: estate tax. I just think they should be forced to pay their share and not dilute it by taking advantage of loopholes.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 07:44 PM) this is the best i am going to do for now. part of this was to explain why i wasn't interested in long term players, what ever the positions. sp pitcher is a good area, but short term via free agents may not be as much or not better than a normal #4/3 pitcher. but with names of pos trades, wash has 4 cincy has 1 philly has 1 just look. now for those players, whomever they are, it is going to take prospects to trade. keep them short term or not, QD and get a draft pick. go the FA rt, with what has been pick over the last couple of days, some of those players will want at least 3 yrs. too much, giver the state of the system ready to produce. 1 yr yes 2 maybe 3.... nah. sigh... if there is a viable way to upgrade our rotation further without dealing every prospect we have or not putting us ridiculously over budget, I'm sure Hahn has looked into it. After the offseason we've had, how can you not have faith that if a deal was out there to be done, he'd get it done? I just doubt one exists with the chips we're willing to part with at this point.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 07:35 PM) So rich, poor, etc, everyone should pay the same x%? Where are you trying to lead me with this? I'm not an expert when it comes to tax codes, etc, but I absolutely believe that CEOs shouldn't be paying LESS in tax than their middle management, which is often the case. A consistent rate, and closing the loop holes, seems like a pretty sensible idea - potentially with caveats for ultra-low income folks.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 07:27 PM) the problem i have in all honesty, beside getting a short term pitcher is in the infield. i do not think running Sanchez out there with his lack of hitting, may be the right choice. so how can the sox address that, trade, free agent.... i think free agent may be the only choice. so if the sox get a option that is better than Sanchez, maybe weeks, he would want more yrs in a contract. now look at the beginning of the off season threads.... i have been on Emilio Bonifacio for 2 reasons. to play 2b and if needed play cf if Eaton gets hurt, then moving Sanchez to 2b. well for backup, this is all a new subject. i was talking about improving the team. backup, i wouldn't be surprise if the sox threw M Johnson there and have Sanchez as backup. that is my suspicion. the same thing with the outfield. i do not think the sox will look hard outside the org for that backup. pitching is the sore subject with me. i just leave it at that. so... where are the names?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 27, 2015 -> 06:40 PM) So you're for a flat tax, then? (I wouldn't mind it, IF IF IF there were protections in place from the accumulation of individual and corporate wealth offshore, capital gains, etc.) We all know the example of someone like Warren Buffett (because most of his wealth growth is in the form of capital gains from Berkshire-Hathaway) being taxed at a much lower rate than his upper middle class administrative assistant. I see no reason why anyone should pay a different percentage of their income than anyone else. Doesn't make sense to me.