ptatc

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 10, 2017 -> 01:54 PM) I love this article from the New York Daily News, where Cashman was very candid with his thoughts about the negotiations with the Sox. In this article he states: - Sox are where the Yanks were last summer in terms of "pressing the reset button" - The Yankees set the bar high then in terms of expectations on trade returns for prized assets - Their results for the trades of Chapman and Miller ultimately led to the returns the Sox received for Sale/Eaton - He's willing to put high-end prospects on the table to get a deal done, but ironically, his trades from last summer and the Sox' current trades have established a new sticker price that the team who created this new market value in the first place is now not in a position to meet http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...ticle-1.2941444 No ego there. It also could have something to do with starting pitching more important than a relief pitcher.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 06:19 PM) That's certainly true, and I can't put myself in his shoes. Everything about that franchise not named Longoria kind of sucks. No doubt.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 06:22 PM) Montas went from 81 (injury related) to 127 with a big league callup/bullpen outings between age 21/22, which seems like a fair comp and the most reasonable one I can recently remember where they got into our system at upper levels without a big innings load. That's an example, just like rodon and Fulmer show another. Each situation is different. With the abundance of pitching prospects, I don't think they will feel the need to push him too hard with innings.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 06:07 PM) I can't imagine anyone wanting to play 81 games a year in that stadium...and yet, it's still Florida. it's a heck of a lot better than playing outdoor in florida.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 05:09 PM) This is still the White Sox. Barring injury/punching something I think you're under by a good amount, and I don't think i'll get bent out of shape if they push him more aggressively than that. I think the White sox have been pretty conservative with pitchers and innings increases, not necessarily with promotions though. Things we saw with Rodon and Fulmer, I don't think they will push his innings too quickly.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 05:51 PM) Also not true. It probably originated with large ranches, but it actually impacts pretty much any plot of land in the mountains in Colorado, and anywhere rural in the American West. For instance, until 2016 it was illegal to use a rain barrel to collect water in the State of Colorado. While that makes no sense when you live in Denver, it makes a lot of sense when you live on a mountain stream. Interesting. When I move to the Colorado mountains, i'll keep it in mind. Until then, I still don't get taxed on my well water.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 04:33 PM) I wouldn't be shocked to see a cup of coffee in 2018 assuming everything goes right, but mid to late 2019 seems much more reasonable with the work load needed, and the guys in front of him. Possibly, He will be on a innings limit that probably won't allow much in 2018. edit: They will probably target no more than 130 innings or so in 2018

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:50 PM) I very much disagree. Put 5 out there and you expect they'll need time, and you expect that just from draftees/signees you'll continue to have some supply of pitching coming up more gradually. And if 1 of them falls flat...not only is finding a 5th starter typically fairly cheap, but you don't use them in the playoffs anyway. True. however, that is if you aren't looking for quality. If the sox go the way they are now, they will have 5 really good ones and if they have more quality all the better for trades. If they have more quality pitchers than needed in the post season, they pitch the 4 pitching the best in the rotation and the 5th deepens the bullpen.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 04:06 PM) Depending on the state, there are a number of different types of litigation that may be possible, particularly in dry years. If you're a small enough user and you're dealing with an aquifer that isn't in danger of depletion you will typically be able to slip by under a "reasonable use" standard, but if you try to pump out of the ground and sell your water to a nearby group of farms for agricultural use you'll rapidly be facing a lawsuit that you will lose, and these restrictions grow when you move to places that get hit by droughts because individual use will run into use by agricultural operations and their work will impact your aquifer. It would even be possible for you to split your water rights from your property rights and sell them if you were so inclined. Well, yeah, I if I try to sell it. I was just pointing out when you said you have to pay electric and water tax, that you don't need to pay a water tax and many don't. It's much rarer for the electric, essentially you need to pay that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 04:00 PM) No it doesn't. Water rights and mineral rights are split in ownership from land rights and courts and the state and federal government have made significant restrictions on water rights. You can't just pump all the water you want from a well on your property because that affects the water supply of other people pumping from that same aquifer or downstream from you. Strange, they don't tax me on the water from my well. Nor my neighbors.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:58 PM) That's not necessarily true - particularly in the West. Water rights are often sold separate and apart from the deed that gives you ownership of the land itself. this is true but the cost is mostly for the large ranches and such. Not a small piece of land with a single home.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:52 PM) which then requires paying property tax :V edit: especially in western states, water and mineral rights don't necessarily come with land rights basically short of living homeless and cashless, you're not going to be able to avoid paying taxes if you don't want to. That said, ultimately I get the distinction ss2k5 sees there even I don't personally think it's a big deal. Correct. I was just referencing the having to pay a water tax. I don't through the well. I get the paying taxes part. Although one of my neighbors gets a surplus of electricity through solar and wind power that his net taxes are minimal. A farmer I know with a large number of windmills on his property makes quite a profit from basically doing nothing.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:51 PM) Is Kopech really that far away? I was under the assumption that he would be in Chicago some time in 2018. He only pitched 65 innings last year. It's going to take him at least 2 to build up the innings to be a full time starter.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:46 PM) They are only able to legally pump that water from that well if they own the water rights on that land or lease the water rights on that land and that's a process that the government has regulated since the 1800s. That just comes from the purchase of the land.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:45 PM) That's why I said I'll take one pitcher back, but I am hesitant on that because the logjam is building. If you take back a top prospect as the 2nd guy also, even if he's way down in A-ball, then you're counting on something bad to happen to several of them by 2019 and that's not a very good use of resources. That is just good planning with pitchers. The mistake would be to count on all of them succeeding and remaining healthy.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:41 PM) I think it's the kopech part that I disagree with mostly. Kopech is legit two years away just getting arm strength up. He just hasn't pitched much. So if he is up toward end of 2018 bullpen sounds pretty real regardless. Dunning is A ball. And Lopez/Fulmer have legitimate starter or bullpen? questions that we would have 2 years to answer then. And potential TJS. If we acquired 4 position player prospects i'd be happy but I don't think we are screwed with pitcher spots yet, not with the likelihood a few are in a ball and we know how big the AA jump is. This makes sense. And as I said if they all pan out the value should be through the roof because they all fixed their issues. That will create a really good rotation AND a surplus of talent to trade for really good hitters

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) Income tax, sure. But it's essentially impossible to avoid sales tax if you want to buy food, or avoid various municipal/state taxes if you like electricity and water. I would exclude water as many people have a well. Electricity is a big one though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:34 PM) I would say Kopech has that 5th spot by the end of 2018, but even if he doesn't, you've forgotten Carson Fulmer. You're fully correct that it isn't guaranteed that they will develop into MLB pitchers, but you are missing how we will actually know that - it will require big league innings. If they do not get big league innings then they will not develop into good MLB pitchers. That's where the limits come from. Yes, a couple of those guys could flop, but they're not going to flop against AAA hitters, and even if they do you're still going to move them up and challenge them eventually. I get it. I'm just not convinced that all of them are going to solve all of the control issues even in the minors. So they will just bring up the ones for the rotation that show the most promise and put the others in the pen in the MLB. If they all pan out for the MLB and don't get injured, they will have too many. However, this also means they're stock will have risen, because of the success, and they can trade them for better position prospects at that time. So right now because of the poor system the Sox should just take the best talent they can get, regardless of position.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 03:24 PM) When everyone but Kopech has already had stints at least in AAA and the big leagues? High. Every one of those guys will be arriving in the big leagues by the end of 2018 unless they go down for a full season with an injury, and one thing we both have confidence in this organization doing is avoiding TJS. These aren't guys starting off at A-ball. These are guys who are going to get a stint in the big leagues by 2018 even if they have poor starts to 2017. Rodon, Fulmer, Giolito, and Turner will be in your rotation early in the 2018 season at the latest, and Kopech most likely by the end of the year, if not to start 2019. Glasnow will be in a big league rotation on opening day of this year. So if they trade Q that will be a rotation of: rodon Giolito Glasnow Lopez ? For the guys they will have to start seeing in the MLB. This would be the rotation at the end of 2018. Odds are that Rodon will be gone shortly after with Boras being his agent. There is plenty of room even if they all develop into good MLB pitchers, whicvh with the control issues of a few of them, it's not guarateed.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 12:59 PM) Easier to do than trying to spend on a lineup: 9 (8 in NL) spots vs 5. At least 6 for the rotation (not all will be healthy even if they develop well) Also 6 for the bullpen. The ones that don't develop into good starters can go to the pen.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 11:58 AM) So you'd be overturning your rotation once a year then? Come on man, if Kopech is destroying AAA next year and throwing 100 you're going to be happy with him being put in the bullpen? Hell I could write my post complaining about it already. This is assuming they all develop and all develop at the same rate. What are the odds of that happening?

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 7, 2017 -> 06:55 PM) yea Bernstein and Holmes both showed up in the last hour, both desperately trying to seem poignant and make the moment about themselves rather than Boers. The stuff with McNiel, Jiggets and North was awesome but you just knew the "evolved" Score personalities were gonna barge it and ruin it all, and sure enough they did. This is the same as the Hawk vs. Bennetti discussion. Entertainment vs. professionalism. Fans vs. hosts.

QUOTE (heirdog @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 10:04 PM) Isn't that exactly what Hahn is doing? If he wasn't, then Q would have been gone in December. Yes, that is what RH/KW are doing, so far. The key is to not fold and give in to the lesser package at all. It will be interesting to see if they do hold out and not trade him.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 09:39 PM) I just get annoyed that we allow teams to expand this notion of not moving players at the trade deadline from the mlb team to a full-blown we won't move players in the offseason that are part of a team's contention window. To me, that is a steaming hot load of bulls***. A player of Quintana's caliber and contract terms justifies a little moving and shaking to the rest of the roster in my opinion. Not only that, but it results in the White Sox being forced to take more risk on players by definition, as those who have less risk associated with them will now be part of the god damned contention window. So now you are accepting players further away from the majors, or else players the team itself sees no immediate use for. I have a very difficult time accepting this. Then call their bluffs and don't trade him. The other teams are waiting for the Sox to lower their demands because they all know the Sox want to trade him. Just don't trade him and maybe they will be forced to trade later.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 09:32 PM) Then I will tell the Pirates and the Astros..."good luck with that". The Pirates want to move McCutchen, but given that he just had a down year they're going to have to give him away at a discount if they're moving him - that much is already clear. So, they get a choice - give McCutchen away at a discount and play for 2018, or actually make a run at things this year. If McCutchen does have some recovery for the year, they'd still be giving him away at a discount next offseason because he'd be under team control for 1 year, and they'll be paying his salary this year. If they hold McCutchen and he does have a comeback year, they're competitive for best outfield in the league, they have a solid infield, but here's their rotation: Cole Taillon Nova Glasnow Kuhl There's some talent in that rotation, but you've got 2 prospects, one of whom has control issues and hit the DL last year, another who is now 2 years removed from TJS, Cole who is a legit top of the rotation starter but who only threw 116 innings last year, Nova who is a "Searage hopefully fixed him" guy, no one in their rotation who threw more than 165 innings total last year, Kuhl who is a sinkerballer and a kid with some talent, and 5 righties/no lefties. That rotation has talent, but for them to challenge the Cubs or Cardinals literally everything needs to go right - if Cole repeated his injury-riddled 2016 then they're not going anywhere. So, they want to go against the Cubs and the Cardinals with that rotation, I say good luck. The Astros want to hold Bregmann and all their other guys? Fine. Keuchel McHugh McCullers Morton Fiers Musgrove There's talent there again, but out of 6 guys, one of them had an ERA below 4 last year, 1 of them threw more than 168 innings, several of them were hurt down the stretch. Really, you're taking that up against Sale/Porcello/Price/Pomeranz/Wright/Rodriguez and Kluber/Carrasco/Salazar/Tomlin/Bauer? Hell, Hamels/Darvish/Perez/Cashner might outpitch them, and there's a real good chance Seattle's rotation does too. So yeah, Astros and Pirates, you guys are confident in those rotations? I say good luck. You're going to need it. I agree. That's why I've said all along that I have no problem with the sox keeping him. He will still be under contract when they are good again so don't give him away. Only trade him if the players they get back are worth more than a TOR proven pitcher.