Leaderboard

This post from last night sure aged well

http://www.milb.com/scoreboard/index.jsp?sid=milb&org=145&ymd=20180520

What evidence is there that he is older than is reported? And the comments on Jose being larger or whatever...I think he’s actually much thinner than he’s been in previous years. Jose and Shields are two guys that are adding value well-beyond their on-field contributions to the organization. Moving Jose, absent just an absolute pillaging of another team would not be wise, IMHO. I wouldn’t mind extending him to something that makes sense for both parties. The guy has earned it, and the young kids would benefit.

We're totally going to make a run bros.

I think he's a reliever.

You were right.

I would like this game to go like the previous one.

He’s our boy. He stays.

If you are keeping around assets then you aren't rebuilding you are just sort of existing. The O's are a prime example of why this strategy is stupid. Now they are stuck trading Machado for pennies on the dollar and because they held onto their other assets too long they are worthless. No thanks. I think the rebuild could have been done a little better this offseason by bringing in some veterans instead of for example playing Engel and starting James Shields We did that to some extent with our bullpen but I would have liked us to bring in some veteran starters on minor league deals. Guys like Hellickson was there for the taking.

I mean it wouldn’t be the worst thing for us as fans. I’ve personally never set money on fire but maybe Jerry would get off on that, he’s getting older.

I don't follow the Cubs. Do they need a first baseman? They might overpay again in a trade with the Chisox. Jose A deserves to be on a contender.

This is ESPN you're talking about. To them, Chicago only has an NL ballclub.

I make it a rule to NOT read comments sections. As a rule, that is where the least informed and most opinionated people hang out. And let's be honest here. Nothing the Chicago PD has to say about 20 years ago should be accepted as fact. They routinely tortured people into confessions for crimes they didn't commit in order to close cases, and in some times to cover their own crimes, even keeping a secret interrogation center off of the books that the used to beat subjects into submission. The City of Chicago has paid out over nine figures in lawsuits and settlements to pay off victims of these crimes. People like Jon Burge wrote confessions for victims and fed them to them, so his "knowing" details of the crime while being innocent isn't even that implausible. Finally there is zero physical evidence connecting him or the other man convicted of this crime. At this point, this is Donald Trump saying that the Central Park 5 are still guilty, even after they have been full exonerated.

As far as moving him, likely no team is going to match the value that we see in him.

If he's really 3 years older than they say, then I guess he doesn't fit the rebuild. But if his age is correct, keep him around. We will need some veterans who care as much as he does.

This, but unironically.

Agreed. If a team offers several good prospects they would have to consider moving him. No need to be desperate though. Maybe Shields and Abreu for three studs if James stays sharp.

I agree. Getting Carlos back will be huge. The Sox have lead the known universe in 2 inning starts. If they start to get MLB average starts from Rodon, Shields, Giolito, Lopez, and Santiago, they will still lose a lot of games because who we’re running out in the outfield on a daily basis, but at least they will win their share.

I disagree that there is no development in the MLB. The goals is to win games, of course. However, young players need to learn how to hit MLB pitching as it is better than the minors and young pitchers need to learn to get out MLB hitters. There was a learning point in the Sox win today with Lopez staying out there for that last hitter. I have only been in one MLB team's dugout and it was a veteran team and the players and coaches were constantly discussing these different things with young players. this is especially true in today's game where players are coming up younger. Chris Sale talked about how much he learned from Buerhle. They can't get that learning in the minors.

You sir are the King of Super Fun Happy Time Gamethreads

Hope he doesn’t pull that act again against lightweight p***ies like Salvador Perez in July or Javy Baez in September, because y’know, those guys won something!!!!!!1

I would think that they are doing thier clubs a great disservice then. If you truly put tge contract over the development of the player, you will cost your team a number of good players. Im not saying they should ignore the contract status. If they have determined that the players are ready now, there is nothing wrong with waiting until the next contract mikestone. I believe that is jjn July. However if they wait until next April evrnthough they are ready now, they are doing the team a disservice. I think at least some GMs agree. Look at Soto in Washington and Albies in Atlanta played almost half a season last year. They didnt wait until the next year.

The White Sox could put together one helluva 4x100 relay team.

One thing I like about this team is that it is fast.

The White Sox

You can't hit around .400 without having a high BABIP.

OK, I give up. I thought that he had made a significant enough change in his mechanics and approach, to get him to the point that he might be a passable number 9 hitter, with great speed and defense. The buzz around Spring Training, which lauded his new approach and how good he looked, gave me hope that he might realize his potential. Then, he had a very good Spring. That, coupled with the fact that he really had been a football player, and needed time to learn to hit, were all "straws" to grasp onto. Unfortunately, he has really struggled, so far this season, and may be just about out of chances. As others have said, whoever plays CF now, is probably merely a "place holder,' with the promising crop of farm hands, who will eventually vie for the job.

Thank god you aren't the GM. Paying a dh 20m in his twilight years? No. That will be a bad contract that would be better spent on a position of need in the future. Sox have enough guys in the minors that will become DH/1b candidates. Sheets, Collins, Zavala, Burger. Eloy if better defensive outfield prospects work out. Davidson is already up here too. Abreu is expendable.

Engel and Thompson should never be in the same lineup

Their development has nothing to do with being on a cellar dweller. It has everything to do with giving them the best path to be the best player they can be. The promotion has nothing to do with the current Sox team. It would be to have kopech learn how to get out mlb hitters and for jimenenez to hit mlb pitchers. While the griffey example is a stretch. Your example assumes Jimenez will follow the path of Bryant. There is a good possibility that in 2019 he will fail and need to go back the the minors. This may preclude him being ready by 2020. See Rizzo for this. If he is ready now. Bring him up now. Let him fail now and learn for next year. Just because he fails doesn't mean he isn't ready for the challenge.

Will Kopech have this same learning curve in the MLB trying to get MLB hitters out? If he does, they should bring him up earlier so he can be ready by 2020. Of course, it won't kill them. However, will they be ready by 2020 if they are only up for one year? You can guess that they will be. My preference would be to give them more learning time in the MLB to be sure they have the best opportunity to be ready instead of force feeding them the MLB talent and expecting them to be ready sooner. There was a player who was brought up at 19 and had an OPS of 748 and the next year started his run of over 800 OPS every year at the age of 20. His name was Ken Griffey Jr. So obviously Jimenez should have been brought up earlier. All players are different in their development. Learning is not linear. They need to be brought up when it is appropriate for their deveolopment with the contract timelines as well. If the team feels they are ready for the MLB challenge this year, they should wait until the best contract timeline this year. I think that's mid-july for the super 2 deadline.

I am also less than inspired by Madrigal. Anytime you’re taking a guy who doesn’t fit the physical profile, there’s bust potential. See Fulmer, Carson. But maybe he is the best pick at 4. What I don’t get is the idea of moving him or Anderson to the OF. Sox have like 7 mlb quality OF prospects on the farm right now. I predict at least 3 of them will be better hitters than Tim Anderson. If anyone moves, I predict it would be Moncada to third base just because he has the arm and Madrigal doesn’t.

They shouldn’t be called up until a couple weeks into next season to get the extra year of control when the White Sox are supposed to be good. Giving up that year for both guys just to see them perform for a horrible team is worse than signing Moustakas for 1 year and giving up a second round pick. All of you tankers who think these guys need to be called up ASAP, are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Leave them down, see you next year. They will get over it.

Yup. 1 strikeout today, and he had at least one deep flyout to the wall. They've got his number for suuuuure. *green*

Lol...geezus Christ...people are whiny about how bad this team is...and you want to ship off its best hitter?!?!!? What. In. The. Fuck?!? He CHOSE to be with the Sox. He signed a deal well below his value. He’s invaluable to the young Latino players and clubhouse in general. And some of want to ship him off?!? Lol...goddamn. Some of you don’t deserve a good team to cheer for...honestly.

He'll be a work in progress until 2050 at the rate he's hitting. I've seen enough. Cordell can't get healthy soon enough.

So they had Romo throw an inning then bring in a guy that threw 6.1. I don't quite get the philosophy

I'll take this opportunity to re-post this: Sox pitching staff MLB rank by WAR and RA9-WAR: 2002: 16 / 15 2003: 5 / 5 2004: 18 / 15 2005: 1 / 1 2006: 4 / 8 2007: 9 / 18 2008: 1 / 6 2009: 4 / 7 2010: 1 / 10 2011: 2 / 8 2012: 12 / 6 2013: 16 / 18 2014: 25 / 25 2015: 9 / 16 2016: 13 / 11 2017: 29 / 23 There certainly isn't much *under*achievement in there. Combined, the Sox are 3rd in MLB in fWAR (7th in RA9-WAR) since Coop took over. While maybe the bit about free agent acquisitions doesn't tell the whole story, I don't think the Sox have had anything like the 3rd most talent over that time.

So condescending for being so wrong. You claim to be a CPA, so you should know that projections are based on past known data and are meant to be as accurate as possible, accounting for things such as expected growth rate. So it's reasonable to assume that if 1.4 million were projected, something in the neighborhood of 1.4 million went. In fact, that organization later went on to say that 1.3 million Americans went abroad for medical care in 2016. And yes, that's an estimated figure, but you know as well as I do that actual accurate figures on this sort of thing are not going to be available and that reasonable estimates and approximations are used in all things business. If you want to be unreasonable and accept neither a projection or an estimate, you can choose to, but we both know that makes you unreasonable, since I'm sure you've certified audited financials that make use of reasonable estimates. If you read that article, the first listed, and therefore likely the most commonly given, reason is reduced cost. Even the sentence you quoted says "In addition to traveling in order to save money...", meaning that the article is recognizing your reason as secondary to cost savings. In fact, every article I encounter on the subject lists cost as the first or primary reason for medical tourism, with seeking treatments that are illegal here typically listed as a secondary or tertiary reason. Okay, so let's take the lower number for the US. Using your numbers above and the numbers from the articles, we have 0.38% of the US population traveling for health care in 2016 vs. 0.18% of the Canadian population. In other words, US medical tourism more than doubles Canadian medical tourism by percentage of population. Again, the numbers don't add up in favor of your argument. It's not that hard to convert raw numbers to percentages. I even did it for you above. I don't understand why you are trying so very hard to not see the obvious conclusion the numbers are giving you, that's typically the opposite of how accountants work. In any case, here's a graphic showing Canada as the top medical tourism destination in the world:

There is no difference in cost or service time between calling the guy up mid-July and calling him up in September. If they wait until 2 weeks in April 2019, that would save a year of service time and buy us an extra year of free agency. I think Eloy Jiminez may accidentally trigger nuclear fusion hitting a baseball too hard at AAA if we make him wait until April 15. If we call either of them up now, they would be "Super 2 players". It would NOT cost us a year of control, we would have both of them 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024. However, if they are called up now, or any time before ~mid July, the called up players would be arbitration eligible in 2021. If they're as good as they look, if they are called up now, in 2021 they would each be paid ~$12 million, and their salaries in each subsequent season will be higher. On the other hand, if they are called up after the Super-2 deadline, called up in mid-July, then in 2021 they will be minimum salary players again and their first arbitration year will be 2022. Effectively, each player will probably make another $20 million in total prior to 2024 if they are called up now compared to what they will make if you wait until mid-July. If you call them up now, they have 4 arbitration years. If you wait until mid-July, they have 3 arbitration years. If you wait until April 15, you add in an extra year of control through 2025, but that year is an arbitration year and the player would be back to having 4 arbitration years.