NorthSideSox72

Even under the worst possible light - that Warren used some vague family stories to capitalize on some possible Cherokee ancestry - that in no way excuses Trump's insulting use of that nickname. And bringing it up in response to Trump's continued idiocy is a purely defensive reaction to obscure the point.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 03:36 PM) I did not say he should not be removed. I said that some delicacy should be in order in the process. I don't think that's a "pile of crap". I don't think any more delicacy should be used with him than for anyone else. I can see an argument saying that everyone in a similar position, like say him and Franken, should be given some level of deference. I can at least understand that argument. I just don't see any validity in treating Conyers differently than others due to his race.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 03:19 PM) When there aren't that many representatives who have served a community, and historically the nation has found a great number of excuses to single out and target that community, you should at least be very cautious in how you treat them. Conyers's case IS different. Conyers's case has been revealed by selective targeting using confidential records the likes of which we have not seen for the rest of the House. Someone with access to House of Representatives discipline records picked 1 representative out of 435 potential targets to bring down. There are probably several dozen other offenders in those files who weren't targeted. The person targeted just happens to be from a historically underrepresented group, of the sort who has been targeted many times. At the very least, some delicacy is in order. Why is this person being targeted? Why not others? Who has access to that information? That's a pile of crap. If he did wrong, he did wrong. Now if you ALSO want to see how it is that his records came out but not others, hey, feel free. But that should not stop us from going after this particular person who seems to have done wrong, just because they belong to a certain group. And of course it's also true that maybe he DIDN'T do wrong, but similar things can be said about all those other people to varying extents. So again, his group identity isn't relevant.

Funny thing is, I believe there is actually a room in the White House called the Indian Treaty room, or something like that. Which I suppose could be seen positively or negatively in this usage, but it's a far cry better than in front of the guy who wanted to exterminate their people. I agree that whomever decided to put the podium in front of that photo (regardless of what room it was in) was either trolling (and should be fired for that), or just grossly incompetent (probably should be fired for that too).

Trump was giving a speech honoring Navajo Code Talkers. He gave the speech in front of a portrait of... Andrew Jackson. He of the Indian Removal Act. Then he made a joke about Warren and Pocahantas. There has been no President in the last century who can even come close to touching the sheer stupidity and crassness of this guy. He can't be gone soon enough.

QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 11:10 AM) Nice summarization, by the way. One correction- the Rule 5 is Thursday, Dec 14. Thanks for pointing that out. CBS Sports had said the 15th before, but now all the sources I see echo the 14th, so I've corrected it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 10:33 AM) I loved Mendick at W-S, he was like the only consistent player until Eloy got there, but his AA and then AFL stints were pretty meh. He'll need to show his talent didn't tap out to go ahead of other interesting guys for me. AA was meh, but AFL started terrible then got hot and ended up with a pretty decent line. I think it was an adjustment period, and it's good he was in the AFL. Should put him in a better position to succeed in 2018.

QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 09:59 AM) Dickman needs some love I didn't add him on my just missed, but he was a guy I gave some thought to. He's probably in the 31-40 range for me, somewhere. What's fun to consider is that if today's Mendick existed in the Sox system, say, 2 or 3 years ago, he'd probably in the 20's or maybe even the teens.

Get caught up on the past month worth of news from the Sox minors, all right here. Enjoy.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 22, 2017 -> 09:05 PM) Rep. Joe Barton Congressman told woman he would report her to Capitol Police if she exposed his secret sex life https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=...rN8ZFOD4xbU2nov So I've gotta say, in Barton's case, I kind of agree with him. These were consensual relationships, and if one of his partners aired out his dirty laundry by, saying, sending out a risque photo to the public... then he's absolutely right to threaten sending the police for what she did which is basically revenge prn. I don't at all put this in the same category as the various Franken or Moore situations, where it was non-consenual and/or involved minors.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 27, 2017 -> 08:19 AM) Yeah, I wanted to ask you about Felix Mercedes. He was doing incredibly well at Great Falls and then all of sudden he was gone and I couldn’t find a single article or note explaining why. He would have been at the bottom of my top 30 if I knew what happened to him and it was simply injury related. Just seems like there is more to the story with him. I haven't heard anything, and now with the season over it would be hard for me to find someone to ask. I don't want to go to Chris Getz for something like that, not really worth it. But we should see in the spring. For me, given that his profile wasn't all that great offensively anyway, now that he's playing non-premium positions he's just not in the T30 discussion in my view. That could of course change later.

QUOTE (mac9001 @ Nov 25, 2017 -> 07:42 PM) 1 Eloy Jimenez 2 Michael Kopech 3 Alec Hansen 4 Luis Robert 5 Dylan Cease 6 Zack Collins 7 Jake Burger 8 Dane Dunning 9 Blake Rutherford 10 Spencer Adams 11 Seby Zavala 12 Gavin Sheets 13 Jordan Guerrero - Absolutely asinine he's not protected 14 Zack Burdi 15 Jordan Stephens 16 Casey Gillaspie 17 Ryan Cordell 18 Carson Fulmer 19 Micker Adolfo 20 Luis Gonzalez 20 Luis Alex Basabe 21 Jake Peter 22 Thyago Vieira 23 AJ Puckett 24 Bernardo Flores 25 Aaron Bummer 26 Lincoln Henzman 27 Alex Call 28 Jameson Fisher 29 Ian Clarkin 30 Tito Polo Man, I thought I was high on Zavala at 15/16-ish. QUOTE (daggins @ Nov 26, 2017 -> 11:13 AM) I'll take a crack at this, with two caveats: 1. I think everyone's top 5 is going to look more or less the same 2. Past those 5 guys, there isn't a whole lot that I like (based more on results than upside) The farm is clearly in the best shape its been in years, but I think we're still a step back from the Yankees, Braves (post scandal) or Padres. Hopefully the depth improves to offset the misery of losses piling up. 1. Eloy Jimenez 2. Michael Kopech 3. Alec Hansen 4. Luis Robert 5. Dylan Cease 6. Blake Rutherford 7. Jake Burger 8. Dane Dunning 9. Zack Collins 10. Zack Burdi 11. Spencer Adams 12. Carson Fulmer 13. Micker Adolfo 14. Jordan Stephens 15. Casey Gillaspie 16. Ryan Cordell 17. Gavin Sheets 18. Luis Alexander Basabe 19. Jordan Guerrero 20. Alex Call 21. Bernardo Flores 22. Seby Zavala 23. Tito Polo 24. Luis Gonzalez 25. Ian Clarkin 26. AJ Puckett 27. Felix Mercedes 28. Kade Mcclure 29. The Glass Man, Charlie Tilson 30. Thyago Viera Just missed - The much discussed Jameson Fisher, Lenyn Sosa, Evan Skoug, Luis Curbelo, Jake Peter Felix Mercedes is no longer a middle infielder, he's been playing 1B and OF, so the bar has gotten much higher for his bat. Also he missed the 2nd half last year, and I am not sure why.

OK, let's start a discussion. The offseason is just beginning, and I have not done a ton of research yet. But what does your current T30 look like? Here's mine (and again, this could shift, it's not highly researched): 1 Eloy Jimenez 2 Michael Kopech 3 Luis Robert 4 Alec Hansen 5 Dylan Cease 6 Zack Collins 7 Jake Burger 8 Dane Dunning 9 Blake Rutherford 10 Spencer Adams 11 Casey Gillaspie 12 Gavin Sheets 13 Micker Adolfo 14 Zack Burdi 15 Seby Zavala 16 Jordan Guerrero 17 Jordan Stephens 18 Carson Fulmer 19 Luis Gonzalez 20 Luis Alex Basabe 21 Jake Peter 22 Thyago Vieira 23 Luis Curbelo 24 Yeyson Yrizarri 25 Aaron Bummer 26 Ryan Cordell 27 Bernardo Flores 28 Jace Fry 29 Ian Clarkin 30 Tito Polo Just Missed / Will Reconsider Later: AJ Puckett, Alex Call, Jameson Fisher, Ti'Quan Forbes, Amado Nunez, Tyler Johnson, Daniel Palka, Lincoln Henzman, Lenyn Sosa Discuss!

Ken Sawilchik of FutureSox analyzes the 40-man decisions here, if you want an overall look at the picture.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 20, 2017 -> 04:02 PM) I'm surprised Guerrero is mad. If he's picked he is in the majors next year, if he's not he's in...the same place with the org he already was in. Isn't the rule 5 draft kind of a favor to exactly these sort of players? Well it's also an extra like $50k salary a year, and dramatically increases their chances of seeing the majors that year.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 20, 2017 -> 03:58 PM) Yeah, he did... yikes. But that's not what it was about, it was unrelated. Just bad timing.

Full write-up on Vieira on FutureSox, including a video, scouting info, cap space used, etc.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 15, 2017 -> 03:43 PM) If you believe the tweet from this morning, Micker is not being added. Yeah you mean the Hahn quote? That seemed to be the case, but nothing official. Hard to say. He'd be hard to keep on an MLB roster for a year, but maybe worth the risk for $100k? I don't know.

There was some question about the exact date that MLB teams need to protect players by. It's actually Monday for the deadline. Sometime between now and then, the Sox will make their moves. Here's what I would do: DFA: Alen Hanson, Danny Farquhar, Al Alburquerque, Chris Beck, Juan Minaya (makes the roster 30) ADD: Jimenez, Peter, Guerrero, Gillaspie, Adolfo, Clarkin, Polo, Clark (makes the roster 38) Leaves two slots open for Rule 5 or waiver claims as needed. I'd consider not adding Walsh maybe, but I think he's low claim risk and not a big loss. Clarkin and Adolfo are low risk for claim but real prospects and I wouldn't take the chance. That all said, Sox usually add fewer prospects than you'd think they would, and keep more of the filler arms. EDITED TO ADD BRIAN CLARK

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Nov 9, 2017 -> 01:07 PM) Yep that's what I said! Allowing for a moment your posit that fewer people going to grad school is a good thing... what these changes will do is specifically remove people who are not rich - not a random slice of the population. Making grad school more of a domain for those from wealthy families. I don't see how that's a good approach, even if you want to achieve what you suggest.

In case you weren't aware, the Sox' top prospect Eloy Jimenez has been just killing Dominican Winter League pitching. Yes it's somewhere around AA-level competition, but it's still quite encouraging. Read up on just how big his performance has been so far, from our newest writer at FutureSox, Ken Sawilchik (Buzonthesox on SoxTalk). Enjoy, and welcome our new talent!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 10, 2017 -> 08:41 AM) Motherf***ing screw in my tire. And I have apparently hard to find tires, Pirelli Verdes. f*** I've got Pirelli Scorpion Verdes on my Pilot. They were available all over the place when I bought them (about a year ago), at least for the size I needed. Bought them on Tire Rack and had them sent to a Midas to install.

Y2Jimmy0 dives into the decisions facing the White Sox between now and Thursday. Any eligible minor leaguers they want to protect from the Rule 5 Draft must be added to the 40-man before then, or be exposed to the December draft. And there are a number of prospects worth noting that will need protection. Get all the info here. Who do you think the Sox should protect?

I can't find it definitively anywhere... did the Dems definitely turn the Virginia State House?

There are multiple definitions of the word "rigged" being used in arguments here. If you are talking about the DNC system, financially and via super delegates, being set up to favor pre-defined candidates... that's certainly accurate, and it is one version of "rigged". But that doesn't make it illegal. If you are talking about the maneuvering of money to prop up the DNC and give Clinton more control, that's not really "rigged" at all, that's a hostile takeover. For good or bad. If you are purporting some sort of conspiracy to make it impossible for anyone other than Hillary to have won the primaries... then you just like to use the word "rigged" to feel better. They made it harder for Sanders, but there is no evidence of doing anything outside the rules previously existing and that Bernie was aware of going in (or should have been).