NorthSideSox72

Part of the art of journalism is playing this game. The way Woodward happens to play it is by being a pure journalist - lack of commentary, just reporting everything he can get information on. And let the cards fall where they may. This allows his subjects to feel better about their chances of not looking terrible, while also allowing him access to good information. It's a good example of how to do this really well. Woodward is excellent at his job. Bolded is outright false. And yeah it was found in later investigations just how much, at both CIA and DIA (read: Curveball), was going on to push the case the way they wanted. Your being upset about it seems to indicate you think Woodward should have known every single thing? Seriously, a Presidential administration has so many moving parts, there is no way anyone could ever accomplish that. And LOL at putting Wolff on the same level as Woodward, SS. Seriously.

The fact that Woodward works to present facts, and NOT dive into the WHY aspects, in fact is one of the reasons why I have MORE respect for him than many others. It is exactly what I want out of a book like this. I think he did excellent work on both his Bush and Obama books. He is not treating statements to him as if true - he is reporting the statements. He just isn't adding a slant after the fact, which sounds like what you are hoping for. Besides, in Trump's case, the guy is so strikingly incapable at his job that the facts alone should be plenty damning.

No idea what this means. And I assume this one is sarcasm?

I didn't (and wouldn't) read Fire and Fury, or some of the other trash writer books about Trump, or any of his "own" books that others wrote for him. But I AM looking forward to the Woodward book, due out in September.

Everyone's all "Promote Eloy!" and "Where is Kopech?!", shouting for promotions of the key prospects to the majors. Meanwhile, there have been level promotions within the farm this year for a bunch of key prospects, many of which have been good stories of development. Julie's column this week looks at some of those we've seen so far in 2018.

They said an A-ball club, maybe Winston-Salem, but none of it was rehab. In AZL they took him slow a couple games at first to make sure he was healthy, but even that didn't really count as rehab.

He's never been on a rehab stint - this is just his normal assignment.

Having seen him pitch in person (last year), he's an org guy for a reason.

The hitting and pitching prospects of the month for July for the Sox were easy choices this time around. See who they are and what they did, along with some other strong performances around the farm for the month.

A couple weeks back, our Julie Brady used her Thursday column to plead for the promotion of Eloy Jimenez, who seemed quite ready for the majors. Today, our Brian Bilek takes a look at the same question from a different angle, and comes to a different conclusion. Give this a read, as it's a very well-written view of the "other" side of the discussion.

FutureSox report on Schryver, with some scouting info and other stuff.

Knee surgery, 60-day DL, was set to miss most or all of the year. Might return late, or for fall ball.

Padres definitely have a deeper farm, and Atlanta can argue maybe as well. Sox 2nd or 3rd, I'd say, from everything I've read.

You seem fun. Even if a player doesn't do well, I will never, ever understand people reacting this way to seeing a career crumble. Why say shit like this? Does it make you feel all big and tough or something? He's a human being, he didn't pan out as a ballplayer, I'm sure he's not happy about it either. This just makes you seem like a miserable human being.

I was more showing that mass shootings were working against the greater trend, but... surely you are not suggesting that the only reason crime has been decreasing has been less lead, right? Anyway, that clearly misses the greater point I am going for here. Why have the mass shootings gone from the rarity (a la Laurie Dann) to a constant barrage, when violent crime generally has decreased so dramatically?

That's key too, but it is not about one thing. In other words, yes the access to guns clearly is an issue as it's the instrument of choice. But there are other variables that indicate that is not the only thing at play, and if that was the only difference, then why the consistent drop in crime for decades? Why the increase in these mass shootings when access levels haven't changed materially? Why did one particular type of incident blow up in direct opposition to all the related trends?

Eloy checking boxes, a pair of trades, bunch of transactions (and injuries), team updates (some in playoff chases), news links and more in the weekly N&N from Eric. Everything you need to know!

Forgot to link it earlier, here is the FutureSox write-up with lots of details on Frare (and the intl pool situation as it stands for the Sox).

Yup. I despise Trump, but this alone is not the bombshell it's being billed as, if there is no corroborating evidence. And they are both pretty awful, and untrustworthy, so it may not be true anyway.

It isn't just launch angle for Sheets. It's also how much he lets loose with his swing, and finding the right happy place between swinging out of his shoes and becoming a slapper. I am still not concerned about the lack of power. And I'll link this again, in case anyone missed it, where that case is made in detail. Also FYI, I can't speak to his HR distance in college, but he can hit some monster tanks now. I've seen it in BP. Well beyond what even guys like Adolfo were hitting.

Going to throw this out there and see if it will actually prompt some interesting discussion, around the school shootings. Right now, when it comes to guns and violence, the Democrats/Liberals seem mostly focused on gun control. Restricting access to certain people, certain types of guns, timing and place of purchase, etc. The theory being pretty simple - gun violence occurs at a high rate here because guns are more available here. And on the surface that's true. BUT... Access to guns overall, today, is not materially different than it was decades ago. It hasn't changed. Yet we see this huge increase in school shootings, which for very good reason causes people to demand action, thus gun control. But the increase in school violence does not correlate with access to guns. So why would that be an answer? On the other hand, Republicans/conservatives seem stuck to the idea that the gun itself is not the problem, the user is, which again is sort of true. And that the real reason for the increase is some sort of decay in the moral fabric of America. Problem with this is, overall rates of all violent crimes have been in steep decline nationally for a few decades now. How can this violence be a result of decaying moral fabric when clearly, there are far less violent crimes being committed overall? That doesn't add up either. What does that leave for answers? I have two theories as to the root of the problems, though I don't pretend to know everything (and by the way, I am fine with some types of gun control to help stave off a few of the disasters that way as well)... 1. I think the modern media is a substantial part of the problem. People shooting up schools, these are not crimes of passion or robbery or drugs or territory. They are "I'll show them" and/or "the world will know my pain". That happens when their terrible acts are splashed all over the TV and internet. But, restricting media about what they can report is a bad road to go down. So - how do we address this aspect? 2. Mental health - not just diagnosed psychosis or the like but all aspects of it - needs to become a priority. Early identification of problems, and the provision of care to help head off SOME of these. How do we get there? How to get past the stigma? How to put mental health on par with physical health in our system? And, go...

If you want a little more info on the 2 pitching prospects acquired for Joakim Soria, you can read this article that includes scouting reports and video. More prospects!

While I appreciate the confidence in FS, I would not call Callis and crew lazy. They do this for a living and know an awful lot.

Julie's column this week takes a look at the 2016 Top 30 White Sox Prospects list, to find that while lots of things have changed, some things haven't. She runs down the names of those thirty minor leaguers to see who is still around, who made it to the bigs, and who fell off.

This is an interesting discussion. For me, scouting grades should be about SKILL, not TOOL. This can be reflected by PV vs FV, in part, but some outlets don't make that distinction either. For arm, the tool is the ability to throw hard/far. The skill is getting the ball to the right spot (for a tag or base touch by the receiver) in the least time, which is a function of arm strength, foot work and accuracy. For that grade, I'd put a 55 on Rutherford. If it is just arm strength, then I'd agree he's certainly not plus or even above average, so maybe 45.