caulfield12

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 03:49 PM) Meh. Sometimes I feel like people get way too excited about transfers. Sure sometimes teams strike gold, but a lot of the time, there is a reason why the school is letting the kid transfer in the first place. See Iowa State. Or UNLV/Cincy in the 90's. Lon Kruger, wherever he goes.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 12:07 PM) Long term, I see Montas being the bullpen piece and Danish being the starter. If both, even end up being productive major league pieces, that's a huge win for the Sox. I just think that's what both of them are best suited for IMO. Except unless he's as good as Wade Davis in the 8th or Herrera in the 7th, he's not going to be the closer with Robertson under contract for at least three seasons. They'd be much better off with him making it as a starter, since back-end rotation depth is one of their 3 most critical issues to address, along with C and the middle infield positions going forward.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 02:43 PM) i really don't care what vegas says, and i will stand by my comments till the end of the season. the sox is a playoff team and has a good enuf chance to make a run for it. however in the playoff, without another sp addition, well i let you fill in the rest. remember, i stand by predictions and am going to enjoy drinking my sox kool-aid. If Rodon's halfway as good as most are projecting, then we have four for the playoffs. That's all you need. Look at what the Giants survived with after Bumgarner...Peavy, Hudson and Vogelsong. You can't seriously think that Quintana, Shark and Rodon aren't better than those three? With the Royals, you had Shields, Ventura (who really was their ace in the playoffs), Vargas and Guthrie. Same comment as above. Now they have Ventura, Volquez, Vargas, Guthrie and Duffy/Medlen/Finnegan/Hochevar. That rotation has more overall depth but the only "sure thing" is Ventura, and his arm was tender at times last year (same with Duffy) and they'll both have to deal with innings ceilings in all likelihood to protect their arms.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 03:10 PM) The responses don't have to be exactly the same, but when it comes to expressing to the American people and world your disgust/condemnation, I don't see why leaving out motive when it comes to terrorists is a bad thing. Everyone knows they're a religious based group even if it's a distorted and twisted version of one. Hell, express that in the same statement as you explain how the targets were not random but intended based on religious beliefs. It'd be one thing if we didn't know who committed the crimes or why and were just guessing that it must have been wacko Muslims. But that's not the case here. And it's not a legal case. There are no sides. EVERYONE (with sanity) agrees that these acts were terrible and should not have happened. EVERYONE (with sanity) agrees that targeting people based on their skin color, beliefs, backgrounds, etc. is terrible. Couching the response is unnecessary when everyone is on the same side. There wouldn't be any wars/conflict/strife/terrorism if that last sentence were in fact true. http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/20/politics/pol...bama/index.html Rudy Guiliani...does he really believe what he's saying? "I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe the president loves America," Giuliani was quoted as saying by Politico. Asked by Fox News host Megyn Kelly Thursday whether he wanted to apologize, Giuliani replied: "Not at all. I want to repeat it." "I don't feel this love of America," Giuliani said. "I believe his initial approach is to criticize the United States." Giuliani dug in further in an interview with the New York Times, rejecting the idea that his remarks were born of racism. "I thought that was a joke, since (Obama) was brought up by a white mother, a white grandfather, went to white schools, " said Giuliani. "This isn't racism. This is socialism or possibly anti-colonialism," said Giuliani. How many times have we seen these same sentiments posted...the whole "anti-colonialism" thing started strategically with Thomas Sowell, a fellow African-American who gave fellow conservatives SOME political cover. It's the main reason that 25% of America, and roughly half of GOP voters.....believe/d that Obama is a practicing Muslim and not a United States citizen (the Birthers). OMG, he doesn't wear an American flag pin everyday...so he must be trying to elevate a caliphate nation in Africa instead of helping the American people, etc. He can't act outside of the political lens his father adopted in the 60's and 70's, etc.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 09:41 AM) We should hear today just about every player is in the greatest shape of their lives. The had Gillaspie on CSN yesterday. He drove 18 hours straight from Kansas and arrived yesterday. Why wouldn't you break that up a little bit? Because he's as intense as Ryan Gosling in "Drive" and his g/f has already seen the Grand Canyon?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 09:02 AM) You obviously don't understand probability and statistics because each events probability is independent of the prior events outcome. You probably bet red on roulette when you see there has been 3 black in a row, too, because it is 'due'. It would probably be 50%, lol, although odds say getting four in a row would be 6.25% At any rate, I guess you missed the humor.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 08:38 AM) I think the most I would be willing to go on Samardzija (unless he truly becomes an ace this year) would be around 5/100. I don't think that would get it done. If he leaves in free agency that would still leave us with Sale, Quintana and Rodon as a very solid front 3. Then maybe go and try to sign a mid level guy to a one or two year deal and then by 2016-2017 hopefully 2 of Danish, Montas and Adams will be ready. That's where guys like Latos and Fister would make sense...just like Anibal Sanchez and Fister did for the Tigers to fit in as 4th starters and provide additional depth. They'd be affordable, because of that top 3. The problem right now is the Danks contract also being on the books. Adams' earliest arrival date is probably late 2016/early 2017. As with the Tanaka interest, the White Sox don't see like the type of team to play it in-between, which is what Samardjiza is....being paid as an ace or close to an ace with the numbers being bandied about here, well over $100 million. Danks was the only time they were willing to go long-term and it bit them in the butt, so they're going to have to be 100% convinced Shark is the guy going forward that's worth that type of investment with Noesi/Beck/Johnson/Montas/Danish/Adams all in the pipeline. Personally, I'd rather invest that money into solving the catching situation once and for all.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 20, 2015 -> 07:52 AM) That is crazy. The market will be flooded with pitchers next offseason if no one extends before that. Price, Zimmerman, Cueto, Latos, Fister.... He won't command anywhere near that on the open market. The market next year isn't really THAT amazing. It might change a bit, if Greinke becomes available. Price is likely to stay with the Tigers (at least better than a 50% chance). That leaves Zimmerman and Cueto as the two premium options, which is essentially the same as Scherzer/Lester/Shields...once again, unless Greinke is also on the market and all four of those top guys are free to sign anywhere in the offseason. If you include Samardzija as well, sure, it's better...but there are still 20 teams chasing the same 3-5 pitchers. Latos and Fister will be lucky enough to gather the "table scraps" remaining, ala Shields this year.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/politics/ter...rity/index.html Threat from domestic right-wing anti-government groups might be a greater...

Or it simply means the next time arson is claimed/insinuated it has to be the correct call.

Think of it like the NCAA Tournament. ISIS/ISIL wants to establish credibility, they're a bubble or mid-major team. The only way they can do that is by being perceived as "beating" or at least confronting the US directly. The difference is we don't want to give them an opportunity to play. It's the same reason that the University of Illinois has no advantage in scheduling SIU, Illinois State, etc. If you beat them, it's expected by everyone. If they upset you somehow, it's a disaster. And everyone likes to root for the underdog to take out the big bully team, the Dukes in bb or Alabamas in fb. If we "take the ball away" like Lucy with Charlie Brown, refuse to offer them what they want in terms of anti-Islamic sentiment...in other words, we simply will not acknowledge they're a real power or on anything approaching equal footing to the established superpowers that lead the UN/G8, then what is the effect? They obviously need "victories" and they need allies/financial assistance. Here's an article about how China is pivoting towards Afghanistan/Kabul/Pakistan with the U.S. pullout. http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2015-0...nt_19621445.htm

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2015 -> 04:34 PM) Shoulder surgery for Jurickson Profar, sidelined indefinitely. 18 months ago he was considered one of the top 5 prospects in the game. Hope he makes it back, but you never know. This would definitely seem to push him to 2B when he does come back.

Micah doesn't have the upside of a Ray Durham (overall), but look no further for a player with all the physical tools who had his fair share of defensive struggles. There's the mental side of things to always take into consideration at that level...he was probably Top 5 in the history of the game at 2B in being able to chase down balls in the outfield and down the foul line, but the routine play, that was challenging for him and he'd lose focus, just like Alexei drifts sometimes. With Sanchez, you just have the feeling that, while he won't kill you on a really good offensive team, he's going to start to weigh down the bottom of the line-up and he just doesn't have anything about his game that really stands out. If the Sox still had Eduardo Escobar on their roster, I think they would start him at 2B over Sanchez. Faint praise, indeed...and, with all that said, they seem to be weighing the ability to manufacture runs and wreck havoc on the basepaths more than defense at this point. Of course, it also wouldn't be shocking if somehow Beckham ended up starting again...sigh.

http://news.yahoo.com/the-fight-against-ex...-171017296.html Now that they're listening to Jenks and Fox News, what will conservatives have to complain about with this admin? Seems like they've finally reversed course to take his advice.

I still don't even know if a second year tells you enough. Puig was excellent for the first 3-4 months in 2014 and then fell off a cliff. His power numbers were also off, although he did get a lot of extra base hits. We have three years to go on now with Trout, and he should have been MVP at least twice, if not all three years, arguably. Some would argue Puig is Top 10-15 (future/potential-wise) and some might not have him until the 30's, 40's or 50's in their rankings. Hard to say yet. Cabrera still deserves to be part of the conversation. A healthy Giancarlo Stanton if you're talking best power hitter. Trout, of course. Maybe McCutcheon, although he gets a lot of his value in other areas besides hitting. Cano, for the season he put up playing half his games in SEA. Victor Martinez is unlikely to be there going forward, that's been discussed into the ground. Looking at some of the "younger" names, you have Brantley, Posey, Fr.Freeman, Josh Harrison, Carlos Gomez, Rendon, Starling Marte and Duda. If you would have asked me a year or two ago, I would have said Carlos Santana of the Indians, but he was so bad in the first half it looked his his career was falling apart until he finally recovered. Kipnis, too.

This can go around and around forever. Bill Clinton always says his biggest regret was no boots on the ground in Rwanda. Why, because he felt it was an impossible political sell because of Somalia/Black Hawk Down. Bosnia/Serbia/Croatia, etc. If you want to go back further, you can look at the US/CiA assassinations of Allende, Patrice Lumumba and Che Guevara. How would South America or Africa be different had they been allowed to live? For a more recent example, you should watch OUR BRAND IS CRISIS...about how a US pr firm (Carville/Greenberg, etc.) deliberately tried to re-elect and sustain a terrible dictator in Bolivia and the consequence that came about was Evo Morales as leader and a wave of socialism/populism/anti-Americanism breaking out all across South America. If you prefer seeing how American corporate interests have probably even bigger negative impacts on the development of a country's infrastructure and growth, there's BIG MEN by the same documentary director, about how the US and European oil companies tried to exploit the first major deposit of oil reserves off the coast of Ghana...corruption in that government and its dealings with oil companies...and the spillover effect into Nigeria. Pretty eye-opening stuff. At any rate, to summarize, there's no guarantee that BETTER will be the replacement. There's only the guarantee you're getting rid of one...but often when you attempt to manipulate/control a successor, that's where the US has typically tended to get into trouble foreign-policy wise.

QUOTE (3GamesToLove @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 11:51 AM) I don't like this thread title. Yeah, should have a ? after it. Makes people think when they come to the site a deal has already been struck. My first impression was surprise, but also a feeling that $100+ isn't the type of money the White Sox usually allocate to starting pitchers in their 30's, no matter what the previous wear and tear on their arm/shoulder/elbow has been. Now if Rodon/Danish/Montas completely flop this season (think Matt Davidson's equivalent as pitchers...or Erik Johnson 2014), then I'd be at least more willing to consider it. You'd have to, in Hahn's position.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 18, 2015 -> 06:40 AM) I wanted to see that and Boyhood before the Oscars. Haven't gotten around to Birdman, but I watched Boyhood last weekend, and while it's creative film making, I found it really boring. It's certainly not best Picture material, in my opinion....and nobody should be getting a best acting nomination. It won't, just Patricia Arquette...and it's more of a "lifetime" body of work achievement IMO. I agree that it's not the kind of film that you would ever want to revisit again, and it's not what you would call entertaining...but it was a labor of love to come up with that film-making concept of following a main character in "real life" for 12 years. It's kind of like when we get upset with actors getting rewarded for massive physical changes (Charlize Theron as a serial killer or Eddie Redmayne as Stephen Hawking), playing someone with mental challenges (Russell Crowe as John Forbes Nash), etc. If you do something out of the ordinary as a director as well, it deserves praise but not necessarily the best picture. Boyhood might be the "least loved" best picture of any movie from this generation of films with the possible exception of The Artist.

For the same reason we didn't parade Osama bin Laden's body around the streets of NYC. Because it would only create more antagonism and bring in numerous new terror recruits. btw, what specific Muslim terrorists are you arguing that Obama is trying to pacify by not calling them out for their actions? Basically, you want the George W. Bush or Joe Mantegna (Criminal Minds) aggressive and "in your face" style of confrontation...instead of Mandy Patinkin's more cerebral/passive approach. Neither is absolutely, 100% right or wrong...you have to utilize both approaches to be effective. Always being the aggressor in foreign policy will lead to widespread loss of life. OTOH, if your enemies don't fear you and call your bluff because they don't believe you have the guts to do what it takes in order to stop them, that elicits confidence on the side of fear and terrorism. No matter what Obama has said publicly, the extreme increase in drone strikes shows that he really hasn't broken much at all with his predecessor in regards to the war on terrorism...many Democrats fault him for going back on a number of his foreign policy promises and have been greatly disappointed.

On the other hand, there's not a comprehensive statistical measure that's universally accepted, either. That system for looking at relievers' leverage is interesting, and it's better than something like pythagorean wins and losses, but it's just one facet of managing. For example, how much would that one facet alone be weighted at, 15%? 20%? What would the other tenets of managing be with measurables? Line-up construction? Dealing with the media? Effective use of double shifts? PH/platooning decisions? Would would you measure relationships with the coaching staff and front office, etc.? Showing patience and poise, versus being more fiery, like a drill instructor? These are very subjective and changeable aspects as well...they won't hold constant as a manager evolves. Wins per payroll/salary dollar? Well, that will always overrate managers of teams like the Marlins or Padres, and weigh down the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels, etc. Even with your bullpen leverage stat, it doesn't necessarily predict who would do the best with the most talented bullpen...who would be able to manage best in the playoffs, etc.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 17, 2015 -> 01:32 PM) None of them will top Miracle (that's Disney, right?) but I still think this one looks promising. Or the Dennis Quaid one where he plays Jim Morris of the Rays.

Remember when this guy was THE story of the NCAA tourney in 2013? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Enfield Now 4-27 in his first 31 PAC-10 games.

They could be passed up. The White Sox are the most improved team in baseball. The Indians aren't going anywhere. The Royals went to the World Series last year. Full article on positives and negatives for the Tigers winning their fifth consecutive division title. http://www.freep.com/story/sports/mlb/tige...sules/23416445/

QUOTE (AlSoxfan @ Feb 16, 2015 -> 07:45 PM) Well you could go with Robin either way...grins but those are all good names an by the way I forgot to say congrats I'd take the over on 82 wins but don't think I'd bet our Sox for the WS win but can't really be counted out. I'm really not sure who in the AL though, could be a few different teams there. The Nats do look pretty solid in the NL. Seems like it's always a wild card team that wins it though. Gonna be a good yr. I think, a lot of teams are able to win it this yr....not many push-overs The Mariners are a popular pick, obviously...there's clearly (at least now) no dominant AL team. The Yankees and Red Sox are both going through transition periods. LA is relying on a repeat from Calhoun, plus Matt Joyce, David Freese, Rutledge, Iannetta, there's too many question marks, IMO. Richards, Weaver, CJ Wilson, Shoemaker, Heaney and Santiago is the rotation. Weaver has been more hittable with diminished velocity, Wilson has been borderline Danks-ish...Shoemaker/Heaney/Santiago are all wildcards, although Shoemaker was a pleasant surprise. Baltimore, KC and the Tigers haven't improved from last season. Theoretically, the Blue Jays could surprise as well...maybe the Rangers.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Feb 16, 2015 -> 02:39 PM) Strangely good timing for Cameron Monaghan that his character in Shameless goes on the deep end of crazy this week and they show that creepy close-up scene of Ian walking through the mental institution, a day before his debut as The Joker on Gotham tonight. That worked out rather perfectly for Cameron and Gotham. His career is starting to take off...he was in The Giver and at least one other big Hollywood movie recently. Shameless and The Walking Dead have been tough watches recently, but that was the best Shameless in months. The show has its best moments away from Frank, who ironically is the most talented actor but sucks all the energy away from the rest of the cast at times. They need to figure out a resolution to the Kevin/family problem soon because he's kind of gotten lost in the shuffle this year.