ptatc

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 05:48 AM) Of all the things in a Quintana deal, the surest thing is Q. If you are worried not trading him will screw everything up, you should be more worried trading him asap and just taking what they can get, will screw everything up. All the guys the Wox received for Sale and Eaton look great on paper, but as of now we really don't know if any of them can really play, let alone as well as Sale or Eaton. No doubt. They can't trade him for less than his value. It will hurt the team in the long run.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 01:51 PM) Interesting Glasnow news, since he is related to Q News: Black Beard’s Delight: Hey ENO! I read an interesting article on Tyler Glasnow this week. He is shortening his delivery and the Pirates are giving him his 2 seam back. Mainly just wanted to share that with you, but does that improve your outlook on him? 12:31 Eno Sarris: If he can throw the two-seam to the middle of the plate because he has confidence in the movement, maybe one or both combined will help his command. He would take a huge leap forward if he could just get ahead more often because the curve is great. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eno-sarris-...all-chat-11917/ This thought process is odd. The 2 seamer has more movement and is more difficult to control than in 4 seasmer, in general. Teams usually take away the 2 seamer from pitchers with poor control. Maybe he is just more comfortable with the 2 seamer and it will help, but the thought process is backwards.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 19, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) No way. On top of those two, they'd have to trade Lawrie, Jones, Cabrera, Abreu, Rodon, and Gonzalez, and they'd still probably lose only 110 games. Not to mention Ventura is no longer the manager. That is worth at least 10 wins there.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 06:55 PM) Andruw Jones and Omar Vizquel have to have legit shots. Andruw Jones while very good was never really dominant. I don't think so. Vizquel maybe but borderline.

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 06:15 PM) Yeah, but the piece you bolded is nonsense and highly unlikely to happen. I agree. That is why I responded to the poster's idea that they shouldn't wait to trade Q because if Giolito, Kopech and Lopez could blow out their arms and keeping Q would be wasteful.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 05:41 PM) Unless you have a crystal ball, you cannot say with absolute certainty he will be a good pitcher when he's 29. John Danks is a prime example. Hell, Giolito, Kopeck, and/or Lopez could all blow their arms out over the course of the next 2 years. Keeping Quintana to be an anchor in the rotation in anticipation for *if* the Sox can compete come 2019-20 is just a bad idea. Sox need to be focusing on acquiring as much talent as they can either by trade or draft. You can't keep players on the off-chance they might help you compete before their contract runs out. The only players I would say have an exception regarding this is Anderson and Rodon because both are under team control for a very long time. If this is the case, then all the more reason to keep Q. If the others blow out their arms the sox will need Q if they are going to be any good in 2 years.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 08:14 AM) That's the problem though, he's only worth one or two years as a TOR starter to us based on our projected competive window. While I'm not suggesting they settle for a crap offer, you don't need multiple all-stars to come out ahead. If we end up with even one 3 WAR per year player that can provide that value over the course of five years when we'll actually be competive, we are definitely better off. That's why holding Quintana through the rebuild in hopes he can be part of our next competive team makes no sense. I get it. This is where RH/KW need to determine the value of Q vs. the prospect package. Also, it does make sense to keep Q if the deal isn't what they like. If you project them to have a shot at the WS during his contract, he would become one less "rental' they may need to trade prospects for. It may save them talent in the long run because they would need to make the deadline deal. This is all predicated on what deal is currently offered. I have no issues with trading him but there is value in keeping him as well.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 12:03 AM) When will the team be good again if we don't move Quintana? How much control will we have over him at that time? If their plan works in 3 years which means they will have him for at least 2, if he doesn't sign another contract. As people have stated here he is a very good pitcher. Pitchers like him are difficult to find. If they don't receive a really good offer for him, it doesn't make sense to trade him. He signed a team friendly deal and may stick around longer. They shouldn't trade him for less than what he is worth to the sox as a TOR pitcher.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 10:43 AM) I've seen him do that for a couple years now in drills... someone more informed will have more insight but I suspect it's a drill to build drive towards the plate. Never seen it that pronounced thou. Crazy. I've seen many people use it. i'm not a fan of it as it tries to teach how to throw too hard and thus really put a great deal of strain on the UCL while pitching. Not a fan of the kids attitude of trying to throw that hard. Really sets him up for injuries in the future.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 09:51 PM) Jose Quintana the pitcher is a commodity and like any commodity he is worth what the market will pay. If Coppopela, Luhnow, Huntington and Cashman are all not willing to meet Hahn's price then Hahn's price is too high. That is how a market works. I dont know how much more this has to be explained. Compromise is an essential part of doing business and it is not shameful for the White Sox to meet a potential buyer somewhere in the middle for Quintana. Right now appears clear that Hahn is refusing to budge from outrageous demands, demands that wont be met now nor at the deadline nor next offseason. The risk of keeping Quintana for even spring training far outweighs any benefit. The deadline is not magic. It will not miraculously boost Quintana's value. Its time for the Sox to quit dipping their toes in the pool and get on with the rebuild. Hahn has gone through his salesmanship and assembled interested parties, take the best offer and move on to dealing Frazier, Robertson and (if possible) Melky. That is what is best for the White Sox now. The first part is exactly right. i disagree with the second part. Q will still be under contract when the team is good again. If he is still around, the Sox will have a variety of pitchers to try to build a great pitching staff, then they can buy hitters because all of the pitchers will be at a very low cost.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 16, 2017 -> 03:10 PM) Let's clear something up: trading Rodon is not idiotic. If someone offered you significantly more value than he is worth, you'd jump on it in a second. The Diamondbacks gave up Dansby Swanson and Endar Inciarte for Shelby Miller. I'd certainly take those two for Rodon right now. Trading him for what the normal market would pay for him right now, that's a little closer to idiotic, but I wouldn't say it would be totally idiotic. I don't think so. Only because, if he continues to improve he will be worth more later. Unless you think his performance has reached it's peak.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 16, 2017 -> 01:36 PM) Luhnow is only an idiot if he doesn't end up with Q. As it stands he is just a GM trying to get a great piece at his price, notice that no other team has yet so outbid HOU that they are out. I don't know. They are very similar pitchers and Gray will be cheaper for the next couple of years. If the asking price is less than Q, it could be a smart deal. Provided they are confident in his recovery from injuries. That may make him an even cheaper get in regards to prospects.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 13, 2017 -> 07:24 PM) He is saying the reason why he chose them was because of their history in rehabbing that injury. I guess. But he's picking a few good out of a larger question mark. Maybe they are good with the smaller sample. It would still give me pause in the big picture.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 13, 2017 -> 06:09 PM) 57m57 minutes ago Jeff Passan ‏@JeffPassan Sources: Tyson Ross' one-year deal with the Texas Rangers is for $6 million guaranteed. Can earn more with bonuses. Going to be interesting to see how Ross performs in the AL and in that Texas heat when the ball jumps off of bats. I think he should have stayed in the NL in hopes of putting up solid numbers to get a multi-year contract next winter. Ross' numbers have been shielded by pitching in the NL and the most pitcher friendly park in baseball but pitching in Texas with his High BB rate could be a disaster. His injury is a big concern as well. That is not the organization I would would choose when coming back from the TOS surgery. That's tricky enough to begin with.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 13, 2017 -> 11:22 AM) Who is this Brian Bilek clown? Wasn't he the coach of the Baltimore Ravens at one point? Why is he writing about baseball? He's clueless.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 08:48 PM) When is the last time a NFL team played in such a small stadium? How big was the Milwaukee County Stadium the Packers played in sometimes in the 90s? i worked for the Packers in the 80's when they played there. It was a pretty interesting conversion from baseball to football. I would bet it was around 50,000.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:54 PM) Gotta disagree here. Wasting 2 or 3 years of Quintana's value in hopes he can anchor a competitive team for one or two years (best case scenario) makes no sense IMO. His production over the next two years is 100% useless to us, but it's obviously very valuable to other clubs planning to compete. There is a huge opportunity cost to holding him that you're not acknowledging. We can trade him for a group of prospects that fit much better into our competitive window. That makes much more sense than trying to get one or two years out of Quintana while the team is actually good and then losing him for nothing. Also, we only have a handful of bats in the system that we can project as above average major league regulars. It's going to be difficult to find the talent needed to fill those holes without dealing Quintana. He's the one guy we have left that can potentially bring in an elite positional prospect in addition to a couple quality secondary pieces. We still have a long ways to go in our rebuild before we should feel even the least bit optimistic that we can be competive by 2019 or 2020. I strong Quintana return with multiple near major league pieces would go a long way towards that. But the sox aren't wasting his value if they don't get the appropriate value in return. This is where the difference lies. At what point do the Sox decrease their demands that he is more valuable than the return. They will not "waste" value if thety don't get value in return.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:02 PM) Hahn has said may times since trading Sale that he wants the market to come to him. He isn't going to these other teams all thirsty to make his next trade. He will make the big trade when there is a team banging down his door with elite packages of prospect gold. Until then, we wait. This is because he really doesn't need to trade him. He will still be under a team friendly contract when this team is good again, if the plan works. None of these primary players are more than 2 years away. RH/KW traded away the most valuable (and troublesome) pieces to rebuild quickly with near MLB talent.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 11:05 AM) Is this state one of them? Because for some reason they are requiring my daughter to continue to take PE even though she's behind in credits and on her 5th year of HS. Seems to me that it would make more sense to fill her schedule with the classes required to graduate including the ones she needs to make up from previous years. Yes. illinois is one of them and also one of the few that require gym in high school.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 11:06 AM) I don't honestly care which position they put him at, I believe he's athletic enough to play both. However, if you want to get me annoyed and complaining, the way to do that is to change course midway. All that matters to me is the team picks the best position they think will work for him defensively and physically, puts him there, and starts coaching him there. No creative moving him around, no brilliant ideas about him being a super utility guy, no comparisons to Baez, just put him at a position and find someone to tell him how to put his feet and read balls off the bat. i think this depnds on his mental makeup. some players can handle, others can't. No one should assume he can.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 09:04 AM) They're temporarily moving to a tiny 30,000 seat stadium. That can't end well financially. They have had the lowest attendance in the league in recent years and by far the lowest as a % of their stadium capacity. I can see why they thought it was worth the risk. People just didn't go to games in san diego.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 08:19 AM) Rays pick up Coats on Waivers. They got a bargain. We get whatshisname. It's another Garcia. The Sox had to do this to get an all Garcia outfield. It's worth the risk.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 08:13 AM) I still think the protections provided huge multinational drug companies like Mylan with the Epipen patent are surely not in the interests of the public. If you can prove xx amount of research and development dollars has gone into a new cutting-edge drug that changes the world, fine. There have to be incentives for private companies to innovate and be protected. Capitalism and all. On the other hand are drugs or treatments like the example above...or the Martin Shkreli case, where enough is enough. There has to be a balancing. Just like consumer protection agencies determine a "fair and reasonable" amount of interest on credit cards versus usury rates. There has to be some type of compromise in the middle where consumers are protected as well as shareholders. This topic is more along the lines of free enterprise and governmental economic rules and regulations as opposed to medical issues. for the credit card issue, this should be on the person applying for the card. I was suckered by this early in life. People need to check things like this for themselves as there are choices.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 07:58 AM) A couple of things I really like about Scandinavian civics/politics 1) Elementary schools in Finland spend most of their 6 hour school day playing, doing activities, or at lunch 2) In Norway, the prison system is designed to protect the inmates. The longest sentence in the Norwegian penal system is 21 years at which point the inmate is free unless the state can prove he/she is not rehabilitated. There are only 3 states which require elementary schools to even give a regular scheduled recess to students. It's just a shame.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:36 AM) Because they have consistently higher math and science scores than US students. They prioritize education. They don't accept teachers for certification programs who aren't in the top ten percent of their classes. They pay those teachers an upper middle class salary so they don't have to work two jobs or teach summer school. Second, how can the greatest country in the world with the best doctors, medical schools and modern technology/equipment have such poor outcomes? In those countries, the pharmaceutical and insurance companies don't overrun the system and blow up costs. Heck, even in Canada, Mexico or Cuba the same drugs are 10-15% of the cost for the same drug in America. How is that logical? How can we be back to aspiring to be a country where only the rich and upper medical class have access to quality health care under the GOP? How is our prison system logical, compared to that of Norway? http://www.businessinsider.com/why-norways...cessful-2014-12 Read this article or refer to Michael Moore's Where Do We Invade Next? Can you argue that our education, health care and prison systems are better in any measureable way than those countries? A final argument. Those countries (along with Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Singapore, etc.) always end up higher on "happiness/living standards" surveys. How do you explain why this has consistently been the case for a couple of decades DESPITE the winter weather that citizens from that region of the world have to suffer through for 5-6 months every year? Or just use your eyes. People there participate in sports year round...even in the winter. Much better physical conditioning. It's that Nordic look that was the Aryan model so desired by the Nazis/Hitler. Of course, aesthetics is always going to be subjective...but most people in Middle America could learn a thing or two from the diets and nutrition regimens of people from lots of areas outside the US. There are two significant differences in the medical system between the US and countries like Sweden. The first is the medical malpractice. The US uses a tort system with all of the litigation as we know it. It is very costly and dramatically raises malpractice insurance thus raises healthcare costs. The "no tort" version in Sweden is much less costly and more efficient but also severely limits the patient's options for getting compensation for medical malpractice. This leads to the second difference. The regulations for medical practice are much more strict with the FDA in the US as opposed to the other countries. So what you see in essence is that the other countries are using medical and pharmaceutical practices there that aren't approved here. If that new techniques doesn't work there, they have limited compensation. If the same thing was tried here, it would be in litigation for years. So what happens is that the new techniques are tried there, they work out the bugs in the technique, without the cost of litigation, and they are perfected here. This is why the people in those countries who can afford it come to the US for the surgeries because they aren't experimental here.