Two-Gun Pete

I could give a fuck about where Moncada plays, IF he can fucking strike out less than ~30% of his PAs next year. Regrettably, I don't know who will "coach him up," given the incompetence and enabling of this coaching staff and FO, respectively.

Yeah, it isn't so much that an 80-something year old owner has no appetite for spending on analytics, so much as the [snicker] high school graduate team president simply can't understand analytics. He just isn't smart enough to figure this sort of thing out, IMO.

Exactly this. I HATED them stupidly bringing Moncada up last season, because he clearly was in no way ready. He had severe swing & miss issues that were never addressed, severe handedness deficiencies in a so-called "switch" hitter, and questionable concentration on defense. [I also questioned his maturity vis a vis the custom car buying binge and twinkie diet, but others may disagree. YMMV.] What's worse, is that now, its hard to even squint and see any improvement in his game. His K%, BB%, and wrc+ are all worse than in 2017. Despite his BABIP being UP some 15 points, his OBP is DOWN 27 points. He's near the bottom of qualifiers among 2B in MLB in WAR and DRS, with negative trends in both, when compared to 2017. [Well, his fWAR is up this year, but he's played in nearly 100 more games.] To top it all off, I don't have any idea how this coaching staff will help him improve in any way. I just don't think Steverson and Renteria and the rest are good enough at their jobs. I too am not a Moncada "hater," so much as I HATE and despise how this stupid FO utterly bungled the development of this crucial piece of the rebuild hereto fore. I am also NOT calling him a bust by any means, but the trends are not looking promising for him. Setting aside his "garbage time heroics" in the past few weeks, something's gotta "click" for him going forward, or I'm in agreement with you: Some other prospect will have to "come out of nowhere," and surprise us, or this rebuild may be significantly jeopardized, IMO.

Where Rauner has gone wrong is for him to petulantly expect the members of the legislative branch to just do whatever he says, RATHER than knowing that all three branches are co-equals. Where Rauner's burned all bridges is to petulantly blame Madigan for all of this state's ills, rather than living in reality, and [for better or worse] figuring out ways for HIM to work with Madigan and 67 other dems in the house. It's almost as if he expected his political foes to just bend over and take it, and he's stunned that they don't. [Again, this is where experience matters in the executive branch.] For fuck's sake, several GOP governors in this state have had to deal with Madigan and they were able to get stuff done. Yup, you're correct on the arithmetic. That said, Rauner moronically thinks that he can badmouth Madigan, and then ALSO expect him to "work with" him? What an imbecile! And again, even if Madigan is out of the speakership tomorrow, how do we know LISA Madigan won't be appointed to the speakership? Or Lou Lang, or any one of the other 67 Dem members of the house? To expect the majority-party speaker, in a BLUE STATE, to kowtow to the moron of a governor is just plain dumb on the part of Rauner.

Oh, I'm aware that both Davidson and Castillo aren't worth much of anything in the trade market this upcoming offseason. And yes, you're probably right, in that Avi/Castillo/Davidson will all likely have to be non-tendered or bought out. But my overarching view is that these three would be out of this roster for next season, at least as thing stand right now; I'd rather give Palka/Delmonico and Narvaez/Smith 2019 to prove/disprove themselves.

The need for roster spots, and the relative depth in choice at C means [to me] that Castillo is surplus to requirements, and can be traded for a flyer; I'm relatively comfortable with Narvaez/Smith until Collins/Zavala arrive. Similarly, I'd trade away Davidson and keep Palka/Delmonico. Davidson has no more options, while Palka/Delmonico have options. Is it possible that trading away Davidson and Castillo could bite the SOX in the ass? Sure. But the relative risks are minor in doing so, IMO. For the rest of that list, I don't think I'd offer a contract to Avi , and both Cordell and Engel can be sent back to Charlotte, if need be. Sanchez has value as a utility IF, and Leury can similarly be the 4th OF until Jimenez arrives.

Well, we can't prove the unprovable here. But, we're into the truly difficult part of the rebuild, which is the development phase; I think the extant front office has not done everything to maximize the assets they acquired earlier. Thus, with "fresh eyes" on the assets in residence, perhaps a more prudent course could have been taken with certain players, and cords could have been cut with others that should have been cut loose sooner. The other side of the coin is that having more or less the same top of the front office likely means that there hasn't been much innovation insofar as operations. [Yes, I'm speculating, but long-term incumbency tends to invite stagnation in organizations.]

How many options do each player have left? I think I'd trade away the one with fewer/no options left for a low-level flyer, and give the other one more chances to prove/disprove himself.

OK, here's where I lose your train of thought: The dems have a supermajority in the House. Therefore, EVEN if Madigan is gone from the speakership tomorrow, there is a fucking snowball's chance in hell that another Speaker will be nominated by the dems, and then allow himself/herself to be led around by the noots by Rauner. Especially after Rauner did jack and shit, other than to talk shit about Madigan for four years. So again, why would you vote for 4 more years of the same? This is where I lose your reasoning for voting against your wife's own financial self-interests. And worrying about the NEXT election before we get through THIS election seems odd. Four more years of inertia will be bad, particularly when we as a nation are overdue for another recession, which WILL come, irrespective of who is in power. But having a bad budget is better than having NO budget, because the moronic chief executive won't execute. Full disclosure: I'm NOT a fan of inexperienced, obscenely rich assholes taking over executive branch roles. [See Trump and Rauner as examples, and Pritzker as a potential future example.] However, voting for four more years of the same thing is insanity, IMO. I'm also no fan of Madigan, but to pretend that he's going to turn the other cheek is fucking moronic. Better to find ways to live in reality, and work with people who have different political views than your own, but Rauner has done jack and shit instead. YMMV.

The only things for which I have any commentary are: 1. On Healthcare, continuing to do what we’ve been doing is moronic. Each client I sit with needs to know that [as currently comprised], the average Boomer retiree couple will need to set aside ~$280k JUST for healthcare for items NOT covered by Medicare. http://time.com/money/5246882/heres-how-much-the-average-couple-will-spend-on-health-care-costs-in-retirement/ For those of us in Gen X or later, it will likely be closer to $500K or more. It is for THIS REASON [primarily] that I prefer a system that is Medicare For All, with options to purchase additional “First Class/Front-of-line” supplemental coverage. a. Moreover, how many folks would innovate and start small businesses, IF they didn’t have to fear the lack of/loss of medical coverage from a job they hate? b. How many extant small businesses won’t hire additional people, due to the added expense of health care? c. How many folks won’t move jobs because of the fear of losing coverage? d. Thus, to me, the BEST option is to embrace a “social system” of health care, as we already have for streets, bridges, highways, airports, seaports, national parks, the police, fire department, public grammar/high schools and universities, and all branches of the military. 2. On Gun Rights, hardcore 2nd Amendment types fail to recognize that, as currently written, a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment means that an individual has a right to a machine gun, grenades, a nuke, or the like. There has to be SOME limitation of absolute rights to all weaponry, and we as a society have to choose WHERE to draw the line. [Both for TYPE of weaponry, as well as WHO can be trusted to carry said weaponry.] As an aside, the NRA isn’t about “gun rights,” so much as they are about sucking up cash from arms manufacturers, and then puking it back out to politicians they control by their balls. 3. On the Military, I disagree with cutting spending, TO THE POINT that we NEED a draft. I believe that we need a draft to put EVERYONE’S kids on the line, and therefore, restrain our application of force worldwide. I think loads off freedom freeloaders who never served, armchair generals, and paper tigers are War Hawks, in part because poor kids do the fighting and killing and dying while Jenna and Barbara Bush and the Trump kids never had to do jack shit to do the fighting/killing/dying. 4. Fiscal responsibility is simple: Make a “Balanced Budget Amendment,” with carve out exceptions in cases of natural disasters, financial crises, or war. 5. Lastly, your comment about Hollywood is a strawman argument, in all honesty. Hollywood types only have more influence because they’re in front of cameras more than the rest of us. Who gives a shit what they say/think?

Ok, help me understand your view: 1. There's a snowball's chance in hell of Madigan going away anytime soon. 2. Rauner & Madigan TOGEHTER did exactly Jack and Shit for the pension issue over 4 years. 3. After 4+ years of Rauner talking shit about Madigan, exactly how will 4 more years of Rauner will make any difference? In other words, isn't doing the same thing over and over again [Keeping Rauner & Madigan together] what some call "insanity?" Thanks in advance for your elucidation of your viewpoint.

You know, it CAN be both. It CAN be that he doesn't mind being average, AND it can be that he pads his stats in "garbage time." Looking at his numbers, Moncada did the EXACT same thing in 2017 in a meaningless September as he's doing now: He's padding his stats against sub-standard opposition. So I ask you: Was Yoan Moncada's September of 2017 an indication of "improvement," or were they merely "garbage time" heroics? (Feel free to reference his 2018 numbers, with the YAWNING K rates to answer.) Hell, Adam Fucking Engel has looked cromulent in September. Trayce Thompson looked like a golden god in September a few years ago. When will people stop buying the fools gold that are Garbage Time Heroes? So no, there's no "hypocrisy," unless you're the type that actually believes that "Garbage Time" is a true reflection of a player's ability.

Look, we're all pleased by his recent up-turn in results, but remember that this is "garbage time," and he's facing quite a bit of opposition that are just playing out the string, just the same as we are. I heavily discount garbage time results when considering a player's overall track record. That said, I'm NOT saying he isn't an MLB-caliber player. I'm just doubting that he'll become a star. I surely hope I'm wrong.

Haven't we as SOX fans seen this "he's-fast-so-we-hope-and-pray-he-can-learn-to-get-on-base-and-become-a-leadoff-hitter" movie before? I seem to remember Jerry Owens, DeWayne Wise, heck, even the corpse of Jimmy Rollins as "fast-guys-so-we'll-lead-him-off" types that couldn't get on base. By extension, the White Sox offense has suffered because of this stupidity. By contrast, good teams with good offenses with smart on-field and Front Office Management PRIORITIZE OBP over a player's footspeed in terms of selecting a leadoff hitter. [The team across town seems to do so, but if the rosters were switched, you just KNOW that Heyward and his mediocre bat would be written in INK atop the lineup.] That aside, WHO in this "awesome" coaching staff has the ability to reach this kid? Do you trust Ricky or Steverson to be able to coach him up? I don't. I think those guys were picked by Front Office types that are stupid, and by extension, I think Ricky and Steverson aren't the best in the business at their jobs. Also, you previously questioned Moncada's ability to learn. I likewise doubt his ability to learn, but moreso from the intrinsic motivation angle: After all, him going out and blowing gobs of cash on cars, knowing that he's wealthy-for-life, might be what "success" is for HIM. Maybe he doesn't really WANT to be a STAR in MLB, maybe he's happy cashing checks. Has he shown any WANT to be a better player? Has he shown any DESIRE to be the best? [You know, the personality trait that Jimenez seems to have in spades?] I don't know, but as you said, "we'll see."

Easy, Icarus. Don't fly too high with your vision of Moncada. I think you're seeing things that are not in evidence in a ~30% K rate guy. I'm afraid he will never be a "high OBP leadoff hitter." I mean, he's been a freakin' strikeout machine at each and every stop above High A. At some point, a player is what his numbers say he is; while his past 20 games might be promising to some here, I completely discount a player's garbage time heroics. That said, this isn't to mean that he will NEVER be a viable MLB hitter. He just will never cut his Ks down enough to actually deserve to hit high in the order, but since this stupid org seems to hate OBP, he'll probably be square-pegged into a role that is ill-suited for what he is as a hitter.

OK, I know what I'm about to post may be unpopular, but Recchia knew what he was getting into in MiLB. Him deciding to have children while he's making essentially nothing was his choice. In many other professions that require long years of training before the big payday, those people also choose to delay starting a family, while pursuing their dreams. [Like doctors, for example; many, if not most choose to not have kids until they've made it through years of school, internships, and residency.] Fair or unfair, if Recchia really wanted to be an MLB player, he could have chosen to wait to have kids. But he didn't, so his outside responsibilities outweighed his dreams. To his credit, he rightly chose his responsibilities to his young family, and I think we all wish him the best in the future. Now, to the overarching idea that MiLB players should be given better nutrition and living conditions? Sure. I believe all workers should have better conditions whenever/wherever possible, and MLB organizations should protect their investments in young players more than they currently do. But as an economic question, do they really have it harder than, say, actors who wait tables during the daytime, hoping/praying for a multi-million dollar payday in Hollywood someday? I'm not too sure.

[shrugs] I just look at Moncada, and wonder why the fuck he was brought up when he had OBESE K issues, RHH issues, and was far from a finished product. I also wonder if the [snicker] coaches/manager in Chicago know WTF they're doing. Since it appears as though little-to-no progress has been made on his part, I wonder if Moncada will ever improve, or if this stupid org just pissed the potential of the former #1 prospect away. I also watch Sale pitch, and groan at having squandered him in trade for a pile of Ks, a TJS, and a Basabe twin. Here's hoping Moncada can rise above all this, despite the abject lack of on-field and front office leadership in this organization, and that Kopech's measly 14.1 IP was worth the 2 squandered years of control.

Jack, I admire your honesty with yourself and with others. And, while we are all inside the "fanatic bubble" of Sox fandom, I agree with you: Put all things/all interests in balance. Get into control, and stay in control of as much of your life as you can control. Like you, whenever I catch myself taking too much time away from other, and/or more pressing matters, I force myself to avoid Soxtalk, Sox games, and the like. Take care of yourself, and pursue happiness in life, no matter what, my friend. I wish you the best.

All the shitty snaps made me glad they didn't bother to play the starters at all in the last 2 preseason games. Matt Nagy stupidly refusing to feed Howard all 2nd half was Ron-Turner-in-the-Super-Bowl stupid. 3rd and 1 in the Red Zone, with a hot Aaron Rodgers? Of course you put the game responsibility on your young, unproven QB instead of your quality RB, right? Why are Bears coaches so fucking stooopud?

I agree with all of this, which is exactly why the entire front office needs to be fired. Every. Fucking. Last One. Of. Them.

Im going to have to disagree with you on this. For one, I fucking hate the ENTIRE front office of this team with the FIRE of 1,000 suns. I hate them, because these Forest Fucking Gumps in the front office keep fucking up. Secondly, a fan could give them a mulligan for making "one" poor judgement in terms of bringing up a prospect too early. Say, Carson Fulmer, for example. A patient man could forgive them for screwing up a second call up, such as bringing up Moncada WAY too early. But, when "bad luck" keeps happening with callups, it's a trend. This front office could screw up a cup of coffee. There is/was a cost-benefit risk to stupidly bringing up Kopech for a few measly starts vs. AAAA comp, while squandering service time. A blind, drunk monkey could have seen that there is/was miniscule potential reward to squandering service time, while there is/was a clear and present risk to the organization by squandering Kopech's (or Moncada's) potential. In other words, just fire everyone in the FO, and find people who aren't imbeciles to get us out of this ongoing nightmare.

This happens more than you'd think around the game. It isn't so much of a demotion, as it is a way to get a player a handful of more PA. Especially if he's not coming to The Show, & he's not doing AFL.

I don't think a grievance will actually be filed, because there isn't a snowball's chance in hell it would be successful. The CBA is what the CBA is, and that aside, he's only had 500 or so PA above High A; 300 or so of the 500 PA in AA. He won't be hurt by finishing up the year with Charlotte, and/or getting some more PAs with W-S in their playoffs, then a few weeks in 2019 again in Charlotte. All that said, despite my previous misgivings about his readiness, I feel a lot better about his prospects than I did earlier this season.

I'm in agreement with you, in that I think I've seen enough of Davidson. Palka would be more interesting if he could field a position to the tune of "only" -5ish DRS, but alas, he's a butcher. Oh, and get his Ks below a ~33% rate. For Delmonico, he's quietly built himself back up to a ~95 wrc+, and with health & more exposure, perhaps he can become more. At the same time, while Delmonico isn't who I'd want @ 3rd, he at least has exposure at that position, and could be an "emergency" option, behind a FA signing, Yolmer, and perhaps Leury. Insofar as the bolded goes, I have to disagree. Engel looks like a typical "Garbage Time Hero" who will promptly go back to sucking at baseball, as any number of GTH's have done for the SOX in the past. I've been done with him for months.

OK, it is known that "this" Pope [the former Cardinal Bergoglio] apparently appointed a Cardinal in Chile with some history of sexual abuse cover-ups. But, are you saying that THIS Pope was directly involved in cover-ups, either by priests under his supervision, or other bishops within his Cardinalate? [Asking, because I hadn't heard this.] Also to the group posting in this thread: There are a lot of posts that appear to have fuck-all to do with Democrats in this thread. Any particular reason why they're not [perhaps more appropriately] in the Republican thread? Thanks in advance.