Bananarchy

I hope the user RockRaines is actually Tim Raines.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 05:56 PM) 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. Yeah, but the piece you bolded is nonsense and highly unlikely to happen.

QUOTE (ventura_abreu @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 06:07 PM) I was glad to see that the White Sox are not planning a typical re-build. To quote Nick Hostetler on their website: "I'm not anticipating this to be a 62- or 63-win team," said White Sox director of amateur scouting Nick Hostetler, referring to the 2017 season. "Right now, the way that the team is constructed, we are going to compete in games, battle." It is not inconceivable that Giolito, Lopez, or Fulmer might join Rodon, Gonzalez, Shields, and Holland in the White Sox rotation early in 2017 with Birdi being added to the bullpen. That would presume that Quintana and Robertson were already moved in trades. In fact, I can imagine the White Sox wanting to make room for all three of them by mid-season. One would need to keep fingers crossed that Shields and Holland had bounce back seasons like Gonzalez did last year. Even presuming that Quintana and Robertson were already traded and the veterans had their bounce back seasons, how would the White Sox swing it if they felt Giolito, Lopez,and Fulmer were all ready to be in the rotation by July? No White Sox spokesperson of any time is going to commit to a 63 win season, but the comments Hostetler made are those of a team set up to lose. He used the words "compete in games", not "win games". Expect this rebuild to be real, but don't expect a lot of rebuild talk from anyone not named Rick Hahn.

QUOTE (Tony @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 06:05 PM) If Toews continues to play at this rate, and Kane keeps playing like he's Adam Oates, a deadline addition won't matter much. Right, I just don't feel like this is the year to sell off more talent for a rental.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 04:49 PM) I don't care about Beer right now. My hope is the Sox make quality trades to the point where they have the worst AL record in 2017 with a losing interleague record. If that means they draft 2-5 in 2018, so be it. You have reasonable expectations. The key to future success may or not be one guy (probably not), but we know for sure the way to maximize future success is to add talent through the draft. Right now, that will likely take one or two losing seasons and some strong draft selections.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 04:57 PM) While I feel the same way as you, this is simply not true. There will always be someone who faults a pitcher because their win/loss record. That's a fair assessment. I doubt many of the better GMs and teams are among the people who worry about pitching wins, but you're certainly right that some people do care.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 04:48 PM) Holding onto Q and having him the Sox #1 starter actually may increase his value. It won't help his W-L record. But it might be more palatable to teams to explain to their fan base he's closer to a #1 than a mid rotation guy that many fans from other teams are talking up Q as. No one cares about the W-L stat for pitchers, but the rest I agree with.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 04:25 PM) Still looks so much better than SD!!! God, the Padres are just so terrible.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 06:44 AM) Team is not nearly bad enough to get into the Beer mix as it stands today. If Hahn gets what he wants for Q, we're getting there.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 03:45 PM) I'd rather roll with the younger guys. Sharp at this point isnt any better than Ryan Hartman IMO. Agreed. After the Ladd thing last year, I'm not super enamored with the idea of moving younger assets for a rental.

Now Second City Hockey is suggesting trading for Sharp. How does everyone feel about that?

.245/.325/.460 44 HR /25 2B/ 98 RBI

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 18, 2017 -> 07:44 AM) I mean, they are in 2nd place, so they must be pretty good. The East looks a lot better than the West this year. There is just so much bad in the west.

QUOTE (Tony @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 09:48 PM) The frustrating thing is I don't totally blame the coaches or this roster construction. I'd do that if the big boys we're putting up numbers, but they had no support from the 3rd and 4th lines. It's the opposite. I'm completely and totally perplexed by this Blackhawks team.

QUOTE (Tony @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 09:32 PM) This team just isn't very good. The Top 2 lines are no where to be found. The big money guys cannot underperform.

"You gotta be - bleepin me!" "alright" and some stuff about unfunny "Latins"

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 07:13 PM) As it should be. Nobody cares about hockey and the Cubs are the best organization in town other than the Hawks and happen to play their games on that station. They will ramp up Bears draft coverage soon but what else are they supposed to talk about it? If a Q trade went through, the afternoon show would give it a good deal of coverage. I don't expect a lot from the midday show, honestly. I tend to have meetings during that time.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 02:55 PM) Sounded like it might as well be a pregame Cubs show That's the status quo for the Score much of the time now.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 02:42 PM) Weird hearing Bernstein and Goff together. I think this is actually better than Boers and Bernstein. I'm interested to see who gets the quarterbacking role in the partnership.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 12:14 PM) At the time of their drafts, Brady, Rodgers, and Brees would have been considered pretty big reaches at pick #3. If everyone performs to their pre draft ranking, then the Bears shouldn't take a QB at 3. One thing is for sure, they can make the playoffs with a game manager, but for some sustained success, they need a star. Problem is for every Brady, Rodgers, and Brees, there are about 100 teams that set themselves back 5 years choosing the wrong guy.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 11:54 AM) I think this is a very fair ranking of talent in this draft and this is why the Bears cannot risk a QB as high as their pick is IMO. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000077...-2017-nfl-draft Bears taking a quarterback at 3 based on what we know would be disastrous. Overdrafting by 12 spots? I would fire everyone.

I wonder what kind of pitchers can do that....

5 minutes in, I don't hate Danny Parkins.

Thanks for taking the time to write this update!

QUOTE (shipps @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 08:39 AM) You know, my seasonal affective disorder is kicking in full gear today and I could really use a fun distraction to cheer me up a bit. A day of Whitesox trade talk with breaking news throughout the day would be welcomed with open arms. I need some damn sunshine and blue skies, jeez. It's kind of torture when you really want something to happen and nothing happens. I can't imagine Q being at Soxfest but not making it to the start of the season.