WestEddy

If the Bader and Mullins deals were what was on the table for Robert, I thought it was great for Getz to tell them both to stick it, and to keep Robert. Builds credibility going forward, and all he lost out on was three minor league relievers? (the trade for Cedric Mullins - one of which was a converted 3B) I've got no problem with Getz being tough to take advantage of when he's in a hard spot. I don't really care what happens with Robert. Good luck getting a team to trade for him now that they've all been vindicated by Robert being out of the year before September even rolled around. Next year, you probably have Brooks Baldwin, Teel/Lee and Bryan Ramos (or player moved by Ramos) looking for OF innings. Maybe Robert holds the interest of casual fans? I don't think you get anything more out of the Mets, Phillies or Padres this offseason for LuBob. Maybe somebody thinks they're a CF away from competing next year? I don't think it would be insane to not pick up the option for next year. I imagine they will, and all that will do is smoosh a couple of deserving young players into a single OF position.

Somebody started a thread called something like, "how about we stop engaging in these two disproven narratives", and it's still brought up that some people think apologies were demanded for being angry.

You mean it takes the inspirationally prescient cake? Thanks.

Correct. Chris Getz will have multiple offers to be PBO. By the time he leaves Chicago, "GM" will be laughably below his pay scale.

Or to reengage teams who didn't view themselves as contenders, and weren't prepared to add in July.

Having sex with a minor is the opposite of smart.

Since Vargas' stance change (4/23) he's been OPSing .783. That's great for where he was, but yeah, I think he has to step up in power, and iron out the slumps, or somebody's going to move him out in the next season or two.

Looking at the glass as "half full" isn't "refusing to be realistic or objective". Unless you have a crystal ball on your kitchen table, you don't know the outcome of the season. Positive expectations are as realistic as negative ones. Of the people who bet the under on 49.5 wins or declared the 2025 team would lose more than the 2024, nobody called them unrealistic or subjective.

Is this performance art? Vargas is a league average bat with 30 doubles. That's not a bench player.

20, counting the 8th and 9th against Minny on Saturday.

Did the Royals challenge it? Watching the highlights, it sure looks like he had a sno-cone hit the ground, and the ball bounced deeper into his mitt. Beautiful play, tho.

A pitcher shouldn't get rattled over losing a perfect game in the 3rd inning.

I hated them going back to the time Nancy Faust first started playing the hey hey goodbye when the other team changed pitchers, and they whined like babies.

But that's not really true. Everything doesn't need to go perfect. My contention is that if you roll this same group back, they win somewhere in the mid 60's. That's no improvement from where they've been playing the last 4 months. Now, out of Meidroth, Sosa, Vargas, Mead, Baldwin, Monty, Teel, Quero - some improvement may be wiped out by regression, but everything doesn't need to "go perfect" to gain a couple of wins from this group. Baldwin playing 1-2 positions more adeptly. Sosa and Vargas getting a little better at 1B, 2B, and 3B. A couple of these guys ironing out the stretches of OPSing .400 for weeks. Then you're looking at another wave of pitching that will challenge next year. Some won't be good enough to take or keep a major league job, but then they get replaced. And now we're at the point of the discussion where I say that I'm not trying to convince you to believe they will win 70 games next year. My expectation is that they win 70+. I get to think that. I've laid out that this team is playing at a rate right now that is most of the way there. If you don't want to think that - wonderful...don't. Nobody here is under any obligation to "prove" a 2026 win total. The people who wailed that this team wouldn't cover the newsworthy over/under line set in March or even surpass last year's 41 certainly aren't starting threads explaining how it was that they could have possibly been so wrong. All anybody does is shrug and say that it was reasonable for them to say the Sox wouldn't win 40 games this year when some of us thought that was preposterous.

You just said this: I'm not sure what your issue with this is. If the bottom falls out, they might scrape for 8 more wins. (That's one win each v.KC(3), v.Yanks(4), @Min(4), @Det(3), v.TB(3), @Cle(3), v.Bal(3), and then win 2 of v.SD(3), @Yanks(4), @Was(3)). That's 55 wins. (A .420 pct from May 1, btw.) If they rally, win 2 v.KC, 2@Min, 2.vTB, 2v. Bal and maybe 3 in those last 10, that's 60 wins.

Somebody would have to actually say that if you're going to pretend to quote them. Maybe you responded to the wrong post?

I posted my "work" 9 minutes before your post. My expectation is that the guys who were prospects, graduated, then had months of .500 OPS will hit better. Brooks Baldwin doesn't look like a star, but he can hit. Meidroth, Teel, Quero, Monty, Sosa look like they can aspire to average major league players next season. Will some tank and regress? Sure. I'm not putting money on it, or trading baseball betting tips for the lives of family members, so yeah - the nature of a fan is to root for the things you can see if you squint. I really don't owe it to anybody to act like the worse half of probabilities will happen when it comes to the entertainment equivalent of buying a ticket to a Pokemon movie.

Right now, even with the 5-14 run they've been on since 8/3, they're right at .400 since May 1, which I've been using as a line separating the dreck they brought into the season, and the prospects they've promoted, and Vargas/Sosa seemingly adjusting to the league. So, I think they're a .400 team, which translates to 65-97 over 162. If these guys continue to develop, any of the starters step up, or any of Schultz/Taylor/McDougal crash the rotation, Robert plays more like the 2nd half, maybe they pick up an arm and bat - can you not see them adding 5 wins? That's a 70-win team.

I would expect the Sox to be winning somewhere in the 70's next season, clearing .500 in 2027, and "competing" in 2028. I would show my work, but every time I say where I think this team is per 162, the usual crew complains that I'm trying to make them feel good, or that I'm not prefacing every sentence with "Getz didn't deserve his job" or "the Sox will perpetually set the loss record every single year".

NO! When I'm in a discussion with someone about whether it's worth keeping Robert, or whatnot, it's good to talk about where they are in wins, and how much a guy like Robert adds, or whatever. Every single conversation doesn't have to be about how the Sox are bad. If you want everybody on the internet to shut up and just talk in terms of how bad the Sox are, and will be, maybe the internet isn't for you.

When I note that the Sox have a certain winning percentage since May 1, I'm generally saying that in a discussion to set a baseline of what I believe you might expect from this current roster playing 162. I'm not trying to make you "feel better". So much discussion gets tackled with "I can't believe we're comparing Getz to a guy who was available and hired 31 days after him", or "oh, you mentioned a record, like I'm supposed to feel great about that?"

Isn't that what was on the table from the Reds? I mean, if Robert plays great defense, and continues to hit the rest of the year, maybe they're trading him.

What you gain is having CF filled for most of 2 seasons (fingers crossed), and if he returns to form, slapping a QO on him, which he'll turn down, and getting an extra draft pick in the 2028 draft (if that rule isn't tossed in the negotiations. Compare that to 2 team top ten prospects Robert might bring back. You're taking a big gamble that Robert stays healthy. What do you lose? If he gets injured and misses 60 games, then puts up this sub-.600 OPS stretches, you get nothing. If the Sox run most of this current group back next year, at best, they're a 70+ win team. Depending on how guys develop and if they delve into free-agency after there's a new players' agreement, they might just be looking at being a .500 team in 2027, Robert's last year. He didn't switch to Scott Boras just to accept a qualifying offer for 2028.

I posted 3 facts. Rojas has not been good this season.

3 of his 6 seasons prior to this one, he posted above average RC+. Terrible? Hyperbole. Rojas was having a good spring training before the toe injury. That is a thing. $3.5M for a veteran is nothing.