Dam8610

I didn't think so before Ron made a thread about it. Now I think there's a decent chance he could win Manager of the Year in 2020.

I'll give you a hint. Look at the last three World Series winners. The rebuild isn't to "line Jerry's pockets", it's to get the players the team needs to compete. The high draft picks will hopefully, along with the pieces the team acquired in trade, form the core of the next championship caliber White Sox team.

This all does seem like a bit of overreaction to a bad 10-15 game stretch, which are going to happen with a team full of projects, developmental guys, and has-beens, which is what this team is right now. What I want to see is continued signs or new signs of improvement from Moncada, Anderson, Sanchez, Delmonico, Davidson, Thompson, the Garcias, Giolito, Lopez, and Fulmer and a team that never quits and always puts in high effort. As long as we're getting the latter, I can't really complain unless we aren't seeing any of the former. Development isn't linear and struggles should be expected.

Is there a way to get the old display settings back?

Thanks for the big breakdown, that actually makes me feel a lot better about things right now. It also tells me that this draft and next draft are going to be very important. Still hoping to see an exciting second half team with the additions of Rodon, Kopech, and Eloy and (hopefully) improvement from Moncada and continued improvement from Anderson.

Did the Astros rebuild ever look this uncertain? Just curious.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 18, 2018 -> 09:17 AM) You actually responded to none of my points. You created a straw man instead. Care to actually respond? Or are you sticking to the logical fallacy game? I responded to your 80% comment, care to actually respond to that argument? I'll rephrase here for ease of response: If the 21% of air you're not getting is oxygen, does it make you "ignorant" or "selfish" to seek oxygen by any means necessary? Also, my race isn't nor should it be relevant to the points I'm making, so I instead choseto take your other post as an opportunity to present the actual problems with your strategy. Care to address that? QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 18, 2018 -> 09:29 AM) What's the status of interracial and gay marriage in this country? What's the status of minority and female voting rights? What's the status of abortion rights? What's the status of the strikes for teacher pay in places like OK, WV, AZ, etc? You have a very skewed world-view my friend. Just because we're still fighting for social justice doesn't mean we haven't been winning those battles throughout history - including very recently. To say they don't matter to you is the height of white privilege. You are the prototypical Bernie Bro, and you are why a Bernie candidacy would be disastrous for the Democratic Party in 2020. It would hand Trump or Pence another term easily. But like you said, you'd rather have them in office if it means having a better chance of replacing them with a progressive afterwards, no matter how much damage they do to people who don't have the same privilege you do. Fortunately, you and I get to avoid most of the fallout from a Trump or a Presidency. Aren't we lucky? The difference is, I want to fight to fix that imbalance in the system, and you're fine with it because it doesn't hurt YOU, and you think it'll help you achieve your economic agenda ... at some point. That's pretty messed up, man. Oh look, assumptions about my race and attacks based on it. That's certainly not ad hominem, right Reddy? Yippee we got to the point where we're as progressive on these issues as the rest of the world, and all it cost us was our economic freedom. What a trade! So, again I'll posit, why is it that almost every country in Europe has a better quality of life AND similar or more progressive social policy than the United States? QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 18, 2018 -> 09:56 AM) Dam said social issues don't matter to him. That's what I was addressing. And yes, the Bernie wing prioritizes economic policy over social policy, which is one of the reasons they struggle with minorities and marginalized communities. (As for DOMA/DADT/etc, Clinton did the best he could on that issue at that time, in that political environment. Activists kept working, and eventually, we got to a much better place. But progress is progress and it happens one stepping stone at a time) Now you're outright lying about me. I said social issues do not qualify as "key" to me. That's because we've given economic issues to the conservatives for so long in trade for social issues that it's approaching the point where if we don't fight back on economic issues, they're going to be able to take the little social progress we've made with their economic gains. Social issues are absolutely important to me, that's why I feel they need to take a backseat to economic issues for a while. A more level economic playing field will help everything, even social justice issues, as I've given you an example of before on deprivatization of prisons. QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 18, 2018 -> 10:05 AM) I agree with you. The GOP are masters of simplistic, easily digestible misinformation campaigns. If we want to shift to a discussion about what the Democratic Party can do better, I'm happy to have that talk. There are a number of things. We message terribly, there's little cohesion, and because we're a party of warring ideologies, finding that cohesive message is incredibly difficult. Fortunately, the party has already started implementing a lot of good changes within the past year. Ellison and Perez are doing one hell of a job. Our performance in these specials is a testament to that. But I still would like a response from Dam regarding his prioritization of issues. (Also, a Bernie Bro is usually a straight white guy who prioritizes economics over social justice and doesn't recognize the privilege he has that allows for that perspective. He uses terms like "neoliberal" "corporate shill" and "oligarchy" far too much and incorrectly. He also often criticizes Hillary's personality and equates her with Trump in attacks that he may not recognize as sexist but... they are.) You already have it. "Not priority" means needs to be addressed less. QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 18, 2018 -> 10:06 AM) Of course they're connected. But scroll back. Dam literally said he doesn't care about social issues. It's that to which I'm responding. I'd really appreciate if you'd stop lying about me. Quote a post where I said those exact words, or stop misconstruing "does not qualify as a 'key' issue you me" to be mean that nonsense.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 17, 2018 -> 10:33 PM) Check out Manchin's record this session of Congress, and let me know how he voted on healthcare and tax reform. You're literally saying you'd rather have a far right Senator for at LEAST 6 years (likely longer because of incumbency, like you mentioned) in all of the seats that currently have moderate Dems? So you want to lose on every issue and for the GOP to pass all its wildest dreams? Burn it all down and screw minorities and women because of that 20%? Do you have any idea what the ramifications of that are? Or in terms of the judicial branch? I'm guessing Bernie was the guy who got you into politics? Because that's some grade A ignorant. At least I hope it is. Because if it's not ignorance it's incredible selfishness. If you couldn't get oxygen, would you care about all the nitrogen et al you were getting out of air? Would it be "ignorant" or "incredibly selfish" of you to seek out oxygen by any means necessary? QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 17, 2018 -> 10:35 PM) Also, are you a straight white dude? Just wondering because if so, your "no social issues matter to me" statement is....... pretty indicative if the problem with the Bernie wing. Have you ever wondered why every country in Europe has a better quality of life than we do? What do they do differently? The most prominent thing to me is that they protest and fight for economic justice (and get it), whereas we protest and fight for social justice (and don't get it). Einstein once said that insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've let neoliberals and conservatives run the economy and country for four decades now, and clearly it's not working for anyone but the oligarchs. Also, clearly all the social justice efforts aren't working because society and bureaucracy are as unjust and biased as ever, and are becoming dangerously authoritarian. I'm just a person who looks at the situation and decides to not be insane. We have to try something different, because what is simply isn't working.

QUOTE (cjgalloway @ Apr 17, 2018 -> 07:08 PM) Yeah Collins is starting to turn into a non-prospect for me too... Apart from the walks I don't see how people like him Yeah, it's not like we've ever seen anyone with a low batting average, good eye, and good power succeed in MLB...oh, wait...

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 17, 2018 -> 07:55 AM) Except for all the key issues that he's voted with Dems on under the Trump administration of course. Thanks for proving me right about Berners. Would you rather have someone who votes with you 70-80% of the time, or 0% of the time? What key issues? Bear in mind, no social or procedural issue qualifies as "key" to me. I assess politicians on their positions on the economy, corporate vs. worker interests, taxes, healthcare, and education. Manchin's policy positions on those issues place him squarely with the Republicans. Also, I'd rather have someone who will vote my way less to have an opportunity to vote them out. Incumbents aren't susceptible enough to primary challengers in this country for the Democrats to function as a party that gets anything done and function the way you want them to. But hey, if you think 70-80% is good enough, we can give you 79% of the air you need. I'm sure you won't miss the oxygen at all.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 10:42 PM) Your thoughts on folks like Jones, Manchin, Tester, etc? (not ignoring our other convo, just on the phone and can't write lengthy responses) Manchin might as well be a Republican, he votes with them on every key issue. I didn't like that (I'm assuming Doug) Jones doesn't understand how taxes fund societies (see: wanted to lower corporate rate and would likely support repatriation tax holidays, which have proven to not work as the politicians intend), and I'd like to see what the hell his being an "economic populist" means to how he'll vote. Tester seems to have agreeable ideas on most economic issues, except banks.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 03:51 PM) Kanny postponed due to weather. The Dash are in a delay in the top of the 8th. If the game resumes, Sheets & Adolfo will lead off the inning. Birmingham about to start game 2 of their double-header. Collins at catcher, no Zavala in the lineup. Why do they insist on giving Courtney Hawkins ABs?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 09:17 PM) So you're on the side of Lamb and Trump on the tariffs...? That's an interesting one that splits the DNC/Corporate/Moderate-Aligned/Rubin-Clinton-Obama/Goldman Sachs "centrists" of the party against the progressive leftist wing. The trick for Dems on the national level is appealing to BOTH sides of the party...which probably makes NEITHER side happy, right? I don't necessarily think tariffs and trade wars are a good idea, but I definitely think the unions and the strengthening of them and their rights to collectively bargain are good things and weakening of those things and siding with corporate interests against workers is bad. That was one of the pillars of Conor Lamb's campaign.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 04:14 PM) Let’s put it this way. The Dems (progressives in particular) have to be open to the Conor Lamb?€™s and Doug Joneses of the world to take back the House. No litmus tests. Let?€™s not forget Sanders/Our Revolution has supported a few pro-life and gun rights candidates as well in conservative districts. The gun issue is evolving daily, though. On a national basis, there has to be some compromise in 2020. You can?€™t have Kaine as a VP, and you shouldn?€™t have Sanders/Warren either if you?€™re completely serious about winning, no matter how stacked the deck looks against the GOP on a national basis at the current moment. The Dems also have to make a decision where they are on trade...and it’s not an easy one, as Hillary’s waffling demonstrated. https://medium.com/s/jeremiad/the-unfortuna...il-bd1063814dc0 This article is a bit philosophical...but the two choices for the country (and world) are not so obvious moving forward "Big tent theory" leads to "majorities" that don't mean anything, so instead of saying "no litmus tests", you should say "all I care about is being able to say 'Democrats hold a majority of elected offices'", because the blue dogs (like Lipinski) are DINOs who are more likely to vote with the Republicans on any major issue, so a "big tent" Democratic "majority" effectively becomes a Republican majority with different names in key positions. It's certainly important to vote for Lipinski over the actual Nazi he's running against, but it was equally important, if not moreso, that his primary challenger Marie Newman should've beat him, so that that vote actually caucused with the Democrats on key issues. Also, Conor Lamb is a progressive as far as I can tell. At least he is on the important (economic) issues. I've heard criticisms of him being "pro-life" as well, but his stance on the issue is that while that is his personal belief, he recognizes the importance of legal abortion and will defend that right as a congressman. All I ask for is to vote correctly. I'd even take a Republican who votes correctly for the wrong reasons.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 11:28 AM) Lol. There wouldn't have BEEN an election if Clinton won. And as far as Moore/Pedophilia/Trump, you could make the exact same argument for 2016, except black voters didn't turn out in unprecedented numbers that time. So. I have a lot of trouble with your argument on this one. Why do you feel that black voters are mobilized by a scandalous news cycle in ways others aren't? Why, in your view, did that motivate black voters for Jones and not Hillary? Why don't you think grassroots activism and mobilization within those black communities made any impact? You didn't read The Atlantic article I linked, did you? You clearly didn't read your article, because in it, the activists talk about how everyone "just knew" Hillary was going to win, so they didn't think it was important to turn out. Reading is fundamental, especially if it's a thing you're trying to use as a basis for your argument.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 15, 2018 -> 09:49 AM) Show me the peer-reviewed study or data that supports your case that the black vote in Alabama only turned out because Trump won the Presidency. In the meantime, read this: How Grassroots Organizers Got Black Voters to the Polls in Alabama - The Atlantic The comment about data and peer reviewed studies was in reference to your comment about not taking me seriously because I called our society an oligarchy after I provided a peer reviewed study which proved it is. You can choose not to believe a thing in the face of evidence if you'd like, but that's a tactic typically associated with conservative politics in this country. As for your article, why are you linking me to an article that says exactly what I told you? Grassroots activism is the cause the article lists, and the activists interviewed list Trump as one of the primary causes for the rise in political activism. That's exactly what I already told you. I don't know why you felt the need to share the article, you could've just said you read an article that confirms what I told you.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 14, 2018 -> 07:10 PM) It's hard to take you seriously with all your oligarchy stuff. And black voters did not vote for Trump over Hillary in the general, but they also didn't turn out for Hillary the way they did for Obama. That means that Trump is NOT the driving factor in black turnout. It's issues and grassroots organizing that turns them out, just like everyone else. It's hard to take people who don't take data and peer-reviewed studies seriously seriously. I just said grassroots activism was the main cause, but that only happened because Trump won the presidency. Had Hillary won the presidency, Democrats would've been just as complacent as they were under Obama and Roy Moore would be a senator right now.

Is Patrick Leonard AAAA fodder or someone to watch? I saw he was playing 3B for Charlotte (though he was DH tonight) and he's hitting .281 there, though the OPS isn't impressive at the moment. Thoughts?

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 14, 2018 -> 05:25 PM) Black voters didn't turn out for Clinton. They did for Doug Jones. Explain using Sandersism please. https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/resu...imaries/alabama 77.8%-19.2%. The oligarchy convinced those voters to vote against their own interests, yet again. In fact, the exact same way as when they voted for Trump over Clinton in the general. Why did they vote for Jones? Probably a crapton of grassroots activism that was activated in large part by Trump's presidential election win combined with the Roy Moore damn near admitting to pedophilia.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 14, 2018 -> 03:16 PM) Union buster extraordinaire or dolt? Why not both?

QUOTE (hi8is @ Apr 13, 2018 -> 11:16 PM) Couple of observations about Swaggerty: 1.) it looks like he’s been adding some loft to his swing path this year and it’s been working well for him. 2.) I absolutely love his balance and solid base at the plate 3.) He also looks susceptible to high heat and will need to learn to lay off that pitch Overall, with the little I’ve seen - I like. Low bust probability due to having many tools. Would be nice if he ended up being a lead off CF guy for 6 years of championship ball. 6 years of championship White Sox baseball sounds great to me.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 13, 2018 -> 08:13 PM) Courtney Hawkins is not blocking a single prospect. Collins isn’t sitting for Hawkins ABs. Zavala was at C with Hawkins at DH. I understand letting Zavala catch, but then have Collins DH. When Collins is catching, Zavala can DH. And with the way the kids at W-S are hitting, they'll need that DH slot when Zavala moves up to AAA.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 13, 2018 -> 06:54 PM) I'll ask you a better question. Why did they turn out in such huge numbers for Doug Jones? That's not a better question, because the answer is the oligarchy or "party backing" as it's commonly referenced. Bernie Sanders was calling for free college, free healthcare, government financed job training and apprenticeship programs, raising the minimum wage to a living wage, and major prison and criminal justice reform, and had plans to implement taxes that would pay for all of it that mostly consisted of heavily taxing wealth and the wealthy. Considering the average African American has a far lower net worth than the average Caucasian, is far more likely to be killed by police, far more likely to be convicted of a crime and receive prison time, and far less likely to receive a call for an interview when submitting a resume, Bernie Sanders platform was tailor made for African American interests. That Clinton was able to convince them to vote against their interests is another fine example of the oligarchy at work.

Why is Collins sitting in favor of Courtney Hawkins getting DH ABs? That's insane. Why is Hawkins even still in the org?

If Booker, Basabe, Adolfo, and Sheets keep it up, they're going to need to make some room in Birmingham sooner rather than later. Those four are tearing the cover off the ball. Dunning should already be in Birmingham, and if Cease keeps pitching like this, he should earn a midseason promotion as well.