Two-Gun Pete

Ok, I see that others have gotten back to you before I did. Thank you for your thoughtful response. On balance, this is an example where "both sides do it" isn't really "both sides." Once again, Clinton conceded, so even if there were media types or bloggers hinted at faithless electors, it mattered not one whit. I appreciate you finding that receipt, and I'm sure there are others. Fast forward to today: We have a candidate who refuses to concede, AND a party that encourages this behavior, AND a state AG filing stupid lawsuits, AND a media environment (Fox/OANN/Newsmax, etc...) encouraging this behavior. In sum, we have, at a minimum, guileless sheep like jerksticks and Greg being led around by their balls. AND, we have one side of the aisle encouraging the judiciary to overthrow the will of millions of voters. Or a military coup. So, NO, this ain't equal on both sides. This ain't "both sides do it." And to suggest that it is (No OFFENSE INTENDED) is kinda intellectually dishonest. With respect to the bolded, I agree. Can you agree that the TX GOP head suggesting at secession ALSO fits with your bolded part? If not, I think you should consider it to be so.

Ok, I think you've been reasonable enough hereto fore. But, I gotta ask you to produce receipts on the bolded, because I don't recall that from 4 years ago. That said, the losing candidate "ovaried up" and conceded, almost immediately. Compare that to the nutless orange monkey who isn't man enough to concede, OR the cavalcade of baseless lawsuits, OR the 126 amici, OR the talk of secession by TX GOPers, or all of the shit being spoken about on right-leaning media. See, we're "polarized as a nation," to be sure. But who's causing this? Who's acting childish these days? Who's acting and speaking against our democratic (small-d) values, all in the name of political advantage? I'm sure there were calls for "faithless electors" four years ago, because I've understood you to be a person of honesty here. But, I don't think there was anything NEARLY as harmful being done then as there is today. YMMV.

I feel like the ~2015-2018 Minnesota Vikings tried to do the same thing. They had a great defense, but a shitty offense, with a mediocre QB trying to lead it. They kept trying to patch it together with this QB signing or that QB signing. Ultimately, the defense got old and injured, and the myriad of QB signings and fixes on the offense never really panned out. And while they made an NFC Championship game, they were never able to get to the promised land. [Does any of this sound familiar, with respect to the BEARS?] I agree with signing some veteran mediocrity to keep the QB position warm for a season or two. Or hell, let Foles get his brains beaten in while they try to assemble an O-Line and some skill position players. But, I think this team should really try to bottom out, tank for a year or two, and get a top QB prospect as close to #1 overall in the draft as is reasonably possible.

How is Rick Smith on executive decisionmaking? Does he shit his pants, and give away picks like a $10 whore gives it up, or does he properly value assets? Also, does he constantly have to re-do acquisitions, because he keeps fucking them up, like Tre Burton/Adam Shaheen/Jimmy Graham/Cole Kmet all poured into one position, with little-to-no positive outcome?

I don't have an opinion either way about Dorsey, and I'm not meaning to impugn you or your opinion in any way. But, the first link I saw about him was this: SI Story about Dorsey

How good are the OL prospects this year? Is there an Anthony Munoz-type or Jimbo Covert-type or Olin Kreutz-type on offer? [I'm asking because I give zero fucks about freeloading NCAA sports, and I know little about who is in this draft.] Also, under your query, who will be making the draft pick, a competent executive, or the moron who signed Mike Glennon for $19MM or so?

Meh, I like the price tag more than the player on Dahl. Away from Coors field, he's very ordinary. And he's always injured. Going to a rebuilding, second division team like Detroit is exactly the sort of place he, Mazara, and Rodon need(ed) to go. The need(ed) to show that they can be healthy, and can play at this level. Unreliable and/or underperforming and/or oft injured players like Dahl/Mazara/Rodon have no business on a win now team. Rebuilding teams like Detroit can and do get bargains in FA when you're looking at talented, but in some way flawed FAs like these three.

I for one don't look at Q returning as nostalgic, TBH. Those SOX teams sucked a horse's ass, and were run by morons. I look at the bolded as being the crux of the argument. The 2020 SOX took a giant shit down the stretch, in part because there were only 2 reliable SPs. They likewise failed in the playoffs for the same reason. I think what we discovered is that even in the era of massive bullpen use, someone, ANYONE has to get you innings. And in the era of 3 true outcomes, I favor a SP with excellent command/control to suppress BB, while I count on Katz to work with him on HR suppression. On balance, because of Q's market value and familiarity with the city and the org, he seems to be an IDEAL acquisition. That said, of the 6 issues you raised, only #s 4 and 6 are material to a control pitcher like Q. In the era of 3 true outcomes, an increasing HRA rate is a concern, as is a rising hard hit rate. At the same time, almost ALL of the issues/concerns you raise about Q could also be applicable to Keuchel. Look at Keuchel's FB velo. Look at Keuchel's hard hit %. Look at both players' ZIPs projections. They're eerily similar, yet people are shitting their pants about Q for some reason. But, on balance compared to what is already in house (Cease/Kopech/Lopez), Q offers more to a team ready to win NOW. Especially in the BB suppression area. And, at his price tag, he'll allow for further additions at the TDL, & next offseason.

Man, this list is why I didn't want to give away an asset for a rental during the offseason. I would have rather just used money to sign FAs NOW, then use an asset to get a rental at the TDL. Lynn's a good pitcher, no doubt. But trading for a rental when there are/were a metric fuckton of options coming up seems moronic. A smarter org, like Minnesota or Tampa will acquire one of these guys for their equivalent of Seby Zavala at the TDL. And then this org will wonder how/why that happened. To the point of this thread, I think the SOX have had a short term focus with their acquisitions because they assume that there will be a work stoppage in the near future. I also think this will color their approach for this and next year. Im in agreement with extending Giolito. Getting a TOR SP is a hard thing to do. But I have no interest in extending a 34 year old with a beer belly. A lot of those guys fall apart, because they don't know what a salad and cardio are.

Yeah, but those losers didn't have the coaching brilliance and mentorship of The Great Daryll Boston. After all, he made the most of his ability as a player himself, and was really baseball smart. On top of that, look at all the great defensive OFers this org turned out under his tutelage? He really knows how to bring out the best in his players. This org is truly blessed to have him here.

I hear what you're saying. But I also feel like what you just posted here is how this FO talks themselves into believing that a C/D-level signing is a B-level signing. Its how the Gio Gonzalez signing occurred; I really think they thought he was going to be solid. In this instance; the B-level signing might have been Joc, and might have been a few million more per year than Eaton. But I think the return on investment would have been much greater, if they'd gone for Joc, instead. Shit like this is how the SOX always lose out in the FA market. It isn't just about signing every megastar. Its about knowing the tiers of players available in FA.

Yeah, Eaton's reputation > what he actually is. He's not a plus bat at his position. He's not a plus defender any more. He's always injured, and he's a piece of shit as well. After Springer, I thought that Joc was the best choice. I thought Eaton or Puig would be your desperation options. Given the low rent nature of this signing, I hope they're working on a Giolito extension, as well as a Colas or Cespedes signing.

I'd go with this guy: Rick Smith Hes had a good track record as BOTH a scout, and executive. You can read about why he stepped down, which is/was a tragedy. For coach, I'd let Smith pick him. Whoever he picks, here's hoping he would pick a competent one. Agreed with all of the bolded, though based on general fucking principle, Nagy should be launched. Any fire sale will be underwhelming in terms of the potential return. Part of it is/was the performances and coaching. But part of it will be the decrease in the cap caused by COVID. A fire sale would just be for the purpose of trying to hit the reset button. The defense, when healthy, could be championship caliber. However, the offense and the coaching are collectively replacement level. The problem with such a yawning mismatch is that the defense will get old/injured before the offense improves enough to be cromulent. So, trying to patch this team together (without cap space and without multiple high draft picks) is a fools errand. (Minnesota went through this same experience over the past few years as well, and look where they are now.) This draft, I'd be ok if they worked on the O-Line right away, just as you suggested. That said, as a lifelong Chicago sports fan, I'm accustomed to shitty teams and rebuilds. I think I can ignore several futile seasons, thanks to our many decades of experience in having shitty teams. So, why not go full-out tank, & restart the process? The next tank victory is the next game on this schedule.

With respect to the bolded, the next GM was going to have a hard time the second Pace made the cavalcade of errors around the QB position lo those many years ago. But then, he's made blunders at the WR position that he had to re-do, at TE, at LB, and elsewhere. Pace just might be a dandy scouting director, but he's a fooking simpleton who has no business as a chief executive. He's simply too stupid. With respect to the underlined, there's a whole lot of suck that has happened, is about to happen soon, or will happen over the next few months and years. A big part of this is that Pace is a moronic mouthbreather who can't make proper decisions without fucking them up. FFS, he'd fuck up a ham sandwich. One of his fuckups was to hire a guy who just wants to be an unsupervised offensive coordinator as head coach. Nagy has a compelling backstory, and you REALLY, REALLY want to root for him. The players love him, probably because if you're a starter, you're not held to account, and you don't have to bother with preseason or training camp. But he's not a HEAD coach, in the sense that a HC is the overseer of everything on-field within an organization. He never was, and he likely never will be. That said, I think you're right, in that the BEARS will [once again] do it piecemeal, and fire ONLY Pace, while retaining a lame-duck Nagy. In the process, the rebuild will waste a year while so-called "evaluating" a guy who's in over his head in Nagy. If they want to have a chance to win while Virginia McCaskey is still with us, they really, really need to do "the red wedding" on the front office, and then hold a firesale. Fortunately, there's a real TANK WIN lined up this Sunday. I think the Texans are better than their record, in that their 8 losses are all against winning teams. I think this is a real chance for the BEARS to make a real move up from the 13th pick. TANKATHON!!!!

So, lemme see: 1. An asshole, 2. Declining offensively, 3. Declining defensively, 4. Now a Below average fielder, according to DRS AND UZR, 5. A light duty commando/DL warrior, 6. But cheap/slightly cheaper than better options. So, in sum, a typical "White Sox Move." Add in the giving away of 6 years for a geezing geezer rental at SP makes this a very "White Sox Offseason," right?

Yeah, if you look at the bolded, this is a product of the stoopid outrage media that gullible sheep like Greg listen to. Seriously, if you allow a turd like Mark Levin think for you, you're being led around by the balls or the labia. The most common strategy of morons on OANN, FOX, & conservative media for outrage: 1. Label ALL DEMOCRATS as "socialists, communists," or the like 2. Claim that they're out to take your rights away 3. Claim that GOPers/Trump, and ONLY GOPers/Trump will "fight for you" 4. If you agree with "we the people," you're "a patriot." (Even if you're a freedom freeloader that never served.) Its a media formula that drives ratings, because outrage is popular, and most Americans hate to bother to think for themselves. Unfortunately, its also allowed the sheeple like greg who get lead around by their balls to contribute to an increase in polarization in our politics. Now, a post ago, you admitted that it used to be "Democrats bad, Republicans good." But you yourself have conceded that this isn't necessarily so. And, if one actually bothers to use their own brains, you could see that there are moderates in both sides of the aisle that AREN'T "socialists." And that find ways to work together with folks on both sides of the aisle. I think most people, if they actually think about what they believe in, and what they'd support, most would find some things that are "liberal," as well as some things that are "conservative." I think most people, if they actually used their fucking brains could/would find value on both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately, most folks aren't going to bother to engage their own brains. They'd rather have tucker Carlson think FOR them. Or Rachel Maddow think FOR them...

This is difficult to assess in the year of COVID, and a declining salary cap. Some teams that would have had more salary caps space may have been more aggressive in the trade market, if the cap was to stay the same or increase. We've never ever seen an offseason that will be like this one coming up. What's more, there are still 5 games to be played, and players can either set themselves up in the shop window, or totally fuck up their trade values. For example, Quinn has sucked a horse's ass all year long. BUT, if he catches fire, and piles up the sacks down the stretch, he could be more valuable. Likewise, Mack might be a ~top 10 or so overall player in the NFL. If he gets hurt, or sucks down the stretch, forget about getting anything in value in trade. But if he lights up the league down the stretch, he could be worth a lot more. On balance, it depends on what happens to the team down the stretch. I certainly don't think that Nagy or Pace are the answer. I think Pace is, at best, a pro scouting director; he's out of his league as an executive, because he makes bad decisions. I think Nagy is, at best, an OC; he's similarly overmatched as a HEAD coach. But, if they make the playoffs, they should stick around. But, even if the BEARS make the playoffs, consider this link. If Spotrac is correct, you're looking at the BEARS currently being @ ~$179MM in salary responsibilities for 2021; Hub Arkush thinks the salary cap is going down to ~$175MM. So, just to get down there I think you're looking at 1. Leno and Massie being cut, saving $10MM or so, 2. Graham being cut, saving $3.9MM or so, 3. Either trading Hicks, or cutting him, saving $8-9MM THEN, the BEARS will have to find a way to sign Robinson [Market Value of $18MM], and at a minimum, a punter, a backup QB, a return man to replace Patterson, a DB or two, and an O-Lineman or two. And that's part of why I prefer a fire sale NOW, because this offseason will be ugly for the BEARS, no matter what happens.

I think the way to do it would be to use FA this offseason, to get the team FULLY into the playoff picture. I don't think that this team would need to sign the TOP SP or RF FAs to do that. I think this team could be in the division lead at the trade deadline by adding: 1. A total ~300 IP of ~4-4.25 FIP to the starting rotation between 2 FA SPs, 2. Re-signing Colome to make sure there's at least a 1st half closer, 3. Signing a solution that nets a TOTAL of ~2fWAR/+1 or more DRS/100 or more wrc+. THEN, at the trade deadline, reassess. Either trade lesser pieces for rentals to finish up a pennant race for 2021, or perhaps some of your prospects pick their heads up enough to contribute down the stretch. Trading away MAJOR pieces NOW, just because we're bored during the offseason would surely shorten the window. This system still has talent. But its top-heavy, and shallow, past the first ~6 or 7 names in the top prospects list. Getting rid of anyone in the top 10 this offseason wouldn't be warranted. I'd rather just use money during the offseason than trade assets.

OK, I appreciate your thoughtful response to this. But, I consider the effect of either keeping the two Reps, or putting in two Dems that are from Red States. If we were to use a sort of ZiPS projection/"similarity scores" for Dems-In-Red-States, lets take a look at a report card for recent Senators: Recent Senators, ranked by ideology [I tried to steer clear from far left or far right sources, so I chose this site; if you have another source, I'm open to reading it.] 1. Manchin-D, WV is ranked to the right of Corker-R, TN. 2. Donnelly-D, IN was ranked to the right of Shelby-R, AL and Portman-R OH. 3. Heitkamp-D, ND was ranked to the right of Murkowski-R, AK and Collins-R,ME Given these examples of Red State Dems, I'd guess that Ossoff and Warnock would lie somewhere between Manchin and McCaskill. IOW, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. By contrast? Perdue was the 6th-most far right Senator. And the other stock cheat from Georgia, Loeffler, isn't much of a conservative, so much as she's a Trumpist. Anything that could threaten her precious stock market [intervention] won't be on her list, for example. Since we agree it'll be either BOTH GOPers, or BOTH Dems out of these runoffs, what would be the INDIVIDUAL effect of the two GOPers? IMO, they'd likely take a win as a mandate, and continue to self-deal. And continue to be party > Country types. Loeffler's not really a conservative, so much as she is what you despise, a Trumpist populist, which would only embolden Trumpist types going forward. What would be the effect of the two DEMS? IMO, they'd be smack-dab in the middle, or they'll lose their asses off back home. We've already seen the examples of Manchin, and McCaskill and Tester and others; I think Ossoff and Warnock would likely be the same. The other aspect to consider is the effect on the two caucuses. Again, if McConnell is given the majority leadership, I think he's already shown us what he is. He's a party-first type that will do ANYTHING, even lie his ass off about his intentions, if it scores him political points. And even, to the potential detriment of the country. If you're an Illinois native, what McConnell is is a perhaps less-overtly corrupt, yet equally self-serving partisan Mike Madigan. Which is fooking horrifying, because it comes with national and international consequences. The effect on the two caucuses IF the 2 GOPers win would be gridlock, and exactly nothing getting done. Self-dealers in the Senate won't get their comeuppance, and while we're in a pandemic, McConnell will try to tank the economy, so he can expand his Senate majority. The effect on the two caucuses IF the 2 DEMS win will be that the most senior moderate senators from both sides will have the bully pulpit. THEIR voices will be more prominent, and more influential. Since NONE of the moderate Senators want ANY of the scare-tactic items passed, they ain't gonna pass. Manchin and Romney and Collins and Tester don't want court packing or for the 2nd amendment to be overturn. [So greg, you can stop making sock puppets. Ben Shapiro and tucker SWANSON carlson and all the mouthbreathers you allow to lead you around by the balls are wrong. OK?] With respect to the bolded part of your post, I think that Loeffler especially will perpetuate Trumpist themes and views, while McConnell obstructs, like EVERYTHING. With respect to the underlined part of your post, I think that Warnock and Ossoff will be centrists. And while you might have an INDIVIDUAL quarrel with one or the other, the overall effect on the CAUCUSES will be positive, from a moderate's POV. They've already got some ideas you like. I think that they'll have some you won't like, but as very junior senators, they aint gonna get much done on their own, other than to help usher in an era of moderation and sanity and normalcy in our governance. With respect to the italicized part of your post, I think that the moderating effect of MORE MODERATES in the Senate will lead to more moderate legislation. Biden will have to court Manchin and Tester and Collins and Portman and Ossoff and Warnock. McConnell would have to do the same. But, if it'll be the 2 GOPers, it'll be obstruction, a slower economy, a slower recovery from COVID, all so that McConnell can get his jollies. Just, IMO. I too am mainly a moderate, though on some things I might be to the right of you [a draft, for example], and some things I might be to the left of you [our use of treaties as "force multipliers" to enhance our influence on the international scene, or a public option for the ACA, for example]. That said, I think you and I and the rest of this nation would get exactly JACK and SHIT if the 2 GOPers win. If the 2 DEMs wins, I think you and I and the rest of the nation would get SOME OF the things we like, SOME OF the things we don't like, and more sanity and normalcy in governance. I mean, we're not talking about 2 Senators from California, or Illinois, or New York here. We're talking about 2 moderates vs 2 party/trumpist loyalists.

Nah, I think you're fine to discuss your views here. You've been on topic, and discussing the possible outcomes of the GA runoff IS topical to the election. I mean, it's not like you just created a sock puppet, only posted twice, one of which was to defend Trump, which is off topic. (Like the poster above this one.)

Delmonico and Mendick for Trout and cash considerations.

Yeah, if you're a moderate, I actually think that a 50/50 Senate would lead toward more moderation, not less. If you want moderates to run the Senate, you don't want Mitch McConnell to be the Senate Majority Leader. Hes shown himself to give exactly zero fucks about the success of this nation, and moreso about obstruction, so long as it scores him political points. Quite frankly, I trust the (relative) honesty of Manchin, Murkowski, Romney, and Tester and others over McConnell. To get a big tent group like the Senate Democrats to vote together would take a bunch of moderation. It wouldn't necessarily be automatic that Tester or Manchin would always go along with Biden, in all honesty. I dont see any of the shit that right-wing media blathers to scare people happening with a 50/50 Senate. (I.e. court packing, or any of the other shit greg heard from Ben Shapiro, oann, or fox.) By contrast, we've already seen what McConnell is, and what he would do with a Dem POTUS. And to a moderate, he's antithetical towards moderation. He's party over nation, and he's shown himself to be dishonest in his actions. During a pandemic, I definitely don't want to give McConnell more of a voice. I'd rather give the moderates the bully pulpit by means of a split Senate. FORCE Biden to come to the middle. FORCE McConnell to come to the middle. Force both of them to HAVE TO court the support of Manchin, Tester, Romney, and those in the center to get anything done. I think our nation would be better off as a result.

Exactly this. Anyone could have taken a quick look at Mazaras numbers, and forecast that he kinda sucks at baseball. Yet, Kenny and Rick just HAD TO give away an asset for a guy who sucks, and who had fewer years of control than Walker.

We all get the SOX's need for LH bats. (EDIT) Or, at a minimum, another bat or two that can adequately produce v RHP. I just have an extreme prejudice against wasting time acquiring players who kinda suck at baseball. The Rox gave up on Dahl. The folks who prepare the ZIPs projection think he kinda sucks, and whether you like the projections or not, they seem to have nailed Mazara's and others sucktitude. And yes, there is a clear and present Coors effect with Dahls numbers. Lastly, he's like ALWAYS injured. In sum, I'm against acquiring AAAA types, because they lead to AAAA type outcomes with your team. And there is much more evidence that Dahl, like Mazara before him, kinda sucks at baseball. I know its controversial for me to write, but my belief is that if you want to have a good team, acquire good players, not shitty ones. We may agree to disagree. But, I think we as a Fandom need to divorce ourselves from this idea that oft-injured mediocrities are the answer. We're in the window NOW, so shitty players like Mazara and Dahl don't need to be here.

Look, if you don't believe me, then believe his ZIPs projection. Hell, I'm a giving guy, so I'll tack on an additional 50% on top of what ZIPs says he is. If you give David Dahl an additional 50% step up bonus to his ZIPS projection, then he'd be worth 1.05 fWAR in 2021. Which means Zips thinks he kinda sucks at baseball. A 0-1.0 fWAR type is the kind of player you should be able to scoop up from AAA in your own system. Leury Garcia's ZIPs is 0.9 fWAR, for example. I'd rather use the money on signing Colas, or another BP arm, or maybe a backup Catcher than add David Dahl as the 5th OFer in the org.