Leaderboard

This thread = Epic Fail

We aren’t checked out though

If you have to pick a baseball Mt. Rushmore for every decade of your baseball-watching life, who would be on it? Criteria: 1 RHSP, 1 LHSP, 1 RH hitter and 1 LH hitter Possible additions: 1 RP and 1 Switch hitter For me, the 90s is the easiest Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Frank Thomas and Ken Griffey Jr. You could have an argument for Pedro Martinez being in place of Maddux, but Maddux's dominance over every year of the decade puts him over the top, IMO. Randy Johnson is quite possibly the best LHP ever and probably the best pitcher I've ever seen in his prime period. More dominant than Kershaw, IMO. 2000s I'm having a really hard time with this one. I'm talking about the players who have had their best years during the majority of the decade. Trying to exclude roiders for this one. RHP Candidates: Roy Halladay? LHP Candidates: Johan Santana? Sabathia? RH Hitter- Pujols LH Hitter Candidates: Ortiz? Can't think of anyone better but I also can't help wondering about roiding and having 1B/DH for both of the best hitters of the decade. 2010s (so far) LHP-Kershaw RHP-Verlander RH Hitter-Trout(Miguel Cabrera is 2nd, but he has a lot of overlap in the previous decade) LH Hitter(struggling) Harper? I know I could think of someone better, but it isn't coming to me currently We can also have the disgraced player mt rushmore as well. I'll defer to the Soxtalk old-timers for the 60s, 70s and 80s. Please only comment on players you can clearly remember watching with your own eyes. Considering adding a 5th and 6th player to cover Relief pitching from 1970-present and Switch hitters A switch hitter could be optional, if there is one of the caliber of Mickey Mantle, Pete Rose or Chipper Jones. If you take RP into account, Mariano Rivera definitely fits in the 2000s closer category, but I don't remember relievers that well from the 90s, other than guys that played in town. Didn't watch a ton of out of town baseball until like 98-99 ish. This isn't a solo project, so I'm looking for assistance here.

It is

He's just becoming a better hitter over all hitter. He still hasn't had a season with 300 AB's yet. He should make it this year.

First 3 hit game for Yoan since like....May?

Thanks for starting it. I guess I had the last few games but we lost until Wednesday. I didn’t want to jinx the streak

Mavs don't have a better roster gmab

I doubt we spend as much last year. Again, I think we target some spending on the high end, but ultimately fail as we typically do when it comes to the recruit of top level free agents. I hadn't really considered it in terms of payroll, but I would guess that the payroll will be low. I do think we will try hard to extend both Jimenez and Kopech, and we also will be back spending in Latin America this summer. That won't be enough to make up for the loss of the payroll for guys like Shields and Avi, but I am not to worried about it right now. There is actually a pretty solid case that spending too early might actually be more detrimental to the rebuild by pushing down the levels of draft picks they could get in 2020 and 2021. Yes we could win a few more game next year, but why? To go from 73 to 78 wins? Meh. I am more worried about the teams spending when the time is right.

I think I'm agreeing with @southsider2k5(Yes I'm actually tagging him because I'm interested in his answer to this one) but there's one topic I don't see in this thread yet. Do we really think the White Sox will cut payroll dramatically next year? Next year we're out of the Shields disaster and, if he's right, Garcia seems unlikely to be re-upped. Assuming Abreu is brought back and the obvious ones like arbitration for Rodon and Yolmer, we've got only about $40 million committed next offseason even including all the minimum wage guys. They have absolutely cut the total payroll over the last 2 seasons, on paper our payroll for 2018 is $70 million...However we are also still dealing with the huge bonus and penalties for Robert, which was $50 million over 2 seasons, and since we're worse now than in 2016 and we're not giving up draft picks we are also paying another $5+ million in draft costs, so at least for this year it's like the money spent on players was closer to $100 million, and counting Robert's costs during 2017 we probably spent closer to $110 million, while 2016 and 2015 the payroll was even higher still. Next year we will still have high draft spending, but we won't have the excuse of Robert's money at all and we have expiring deals, so on paper we're basically cutting the payroll from close to $100 million to $45 million or so. Attendance dropped again between these 2 years but not nearly by enough to account for that. Obviously we have to go find 2 starting pitchers just to fill out the rotation with warm bodies, but if 2k5 is right and we're not going to go for the 3 year stopgaps elsewhere, we still have $50 million to spend just to get back to the payroll of this year. If we miss on Machado and Harper...what do we do with that money? I don't know the answer to this and so I'm curious. If the answer involves the phrase "Building equity with ownership" I don't think I'm going to be particularly happy.

right, you want the left to sit down and shut up and never say a bad word about any centrist candidates or policies while those same centrists should be free to attack the left at all times and immune to any challenges

I really don't get it. It's a long-term play and they have some young pieces but going to a Western Conference team was him saying he doesn't care about rings anymore, because he sure as hell isn't winning one any time soon. I don't think they're any better than an 8 seed this year. West is just too stacked.

Which is just putting your DBs in front of a ball machine and practicing interception catching all week.

Cuomo is so progressive he worked with Republicans to make sure the state house stayed in their control!

Are the White Sox purposely losing to boost the team's draft position or is it just a lot of bad luck combined with the frustration over Kopech?

Btw here is his distribution by statcast. Called strike 3s: Clearly in zone: 22 Slightly outside but on edge: 47 Way outside the zone: 3 Yeah he does get screwed some but he also takes a lot of strikes and borderline pitches. Against those 3 way outside he shouldn't swing but certainly at the 22 inside and probably at a lot of the 47 on the edges. He just takes a huge amount of pitches on the edges in and out of the zone. He probably got screwed some on borderline pitches but even votto who has the best reputation in baseball got rung up 28 times on borderline pitches slightly outside. But we can do the comparison: Edge two strike pitches: Moncada -ball 67 -strike 47 41% called strike Votto -ball 57 -strike 28 33% You can see that moncada got screwed some but this is compared to the guy with the best reputation in baseball. Compared to votto that cost him 10 looking Ks which is a lot but compared to the average player it is probably more like 4-5 which is still significant but not as big. You can see he does get screwed some but it is not like he is rung up on pitches way outside a ton, it happened a handful of times but mostly he got rung up on strikes and close balls.

It is not good but it probably also means that he takes a lot of borderline pitches and even strikes with two strikes. He is generally a rather passive hitter at 60% zone swing although he also does have a very good eye (23% Chase rate). Thus he probably got a reputation of being willing to take called strikes leading to close calls against him. I would prefer robot umps too but so far it is not coming and umps don't appreciate players taking 2 strike pitches half an inch outside. You don't need to chase but general understanding is that with two strikes you don't let the umpire decide on pitches that are 1-2 inches outside the zone. Imo moncada should be more aggressive within the zone. He should keep his Chase rate down but 60% zone swing is too low (league average is high 60s). For example votto is also very patient but he has a z swing rate of 68%, this means more hittable pitches going through. But moncada also needs to increase his real strike zone he can handle. If you look at his heatmap you see he basically only hits down the pipe well https://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?playerid=17232&position=2B&ss=&se=&hand=&count=&pitch=&season=&data=&blur=&grid=&view=&type=5 Having one hole is ok, but if you can just hit down the pipe that works in the minors but not in the majors. His swing rates reflect that, he basically only swings a lot down the pipe and takes more than half of the strikes at all 4 edges. This is a good adjustment to make if you can't hit those pitches but as soon pitchers recognize that and locate there it becomes a losing strategy. Moncada needs to hit pitches that are not down the pipe better, at least on two of the 4 eďges. I know you shouldn't make that comparison but here is trouts map. Trout also has a hole (up) but he covers all of the lower edge (actually beyond the zone), inside (except up and in which nobody covers well) and like most the outer half. https://www.fangraphs.com/zonegrid.aspx?playerid=10155&position=OF&ss=&se=&hand=&count=&pitch=&season=&data=&blur=&grid=&view=&type=5 Such a pattern is much harder to pitch to than moncada who can be attacked down, up or in. At this point moncada is basically a patient mistake crusher which has some value but limits his hit tool especially against good pitchers.

Wow. Drama has reached an all-time high in the age of the internet.

He's a decent bounce back guy, but he also has played only 36 games so far this season. He's as good of a bounce back candidate as he is a candidate to be a guy who hit a physical wall starting last year at age 31 when he played 113 games because of injury. He's been hurt for 1/4 of the year and 2/3 of the year over the last 2 seasons. Are you getting him at a huge discount and calling him nothing but a bounce back candidate, or are you outbidding 4 other teams for him based on what he did 2 years ago? Someone else dropped a >$20 million a year price for him in another thread. Is that the amount you'd gamble on a bounce back guy?

I’m going to take one for the team but it’s worth it. You’re an imbecile see yall in a month everyone

To all you new wavers ... what say you about this article? Baseball is in deep trouble. No action cause of all the Ks. Why all the Ks? All the new wavers like many of you celebrate one walk in four at bats. Did you read in this article how little action there is in new-wave baseball? Attendance is way way down. Cities that are embracing the tank may lose their fans forever. Suddenly ol Greg doesn't seem so trolllish does he? I've been pointing out how unhealthy this stat-enduced new wave baseball is right now. Comment on these cold hard facts, folks. Whether you believe it or not, some of these new idioms are boring and unhealthy and taking is simply awful. Can baseball survive? https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2018/06/20/mlb-bad-baseball-attendance-strikeouts/718162002/

Brian - Do you think there is an issue with the pace / lack of action currently? From the tone of your posts, I think you do, but I'm curious. I say this because we are fans (maybe we are in the minority on this site) who obviously are invested in the sport and passionate about the sport (we've spent how much time commenting on it over a 15 year horizon) yet see this type of decline and recognize it. By no means am I saying I hate the game of baseball, I still absolutely enjoy the game...I just enjoy the game less than I did in the past.