Look at Ray Ray Run

Some say feel free to hit that like and subscribe button, I say... feel free to hit that block button.

Every off-season we hear about how the narrative is changing, the Sox are coming... they're all-in ready to spend big. Fast-forward two months:

Trust of the process is earned, not given. The Sox, from a signing MLB talent standpoint have been pretty abysmal. If we're being honest with ourselves, this team is only where they are because they were incapable of building around some stars and flipped them for young talent that pretty much all hit - which is a testament to their abilities at the lower levels to identify talent. Their supplementing of this group has been atrocious though and not at all what they promised. They have signed 1 nice asset - Grandal - and had to trade from the youth to acquire the other one (Lynn). Keuchel is a donut, Kimbrel was a shit show, Eaton was a flat out embarrassment, and their scouting of Cesar was amateur hour.

The dirtiest of dirty on wall street which is saying something.

This is like saying Ted Bundy was kind of a bad guy.

I'm still amazed people thought this guy would be a good owner.

Let's all relish in the thought that now even the Rays have signed a 100 million dollar contract. The White Sox are now cheaper at the top of the market than the Rays.

Wendell Carter is still not good pal. He's on an awful team, getting minutes. King of production without impact. Wendell still a poor post defender, terrible offensive game in the post (no footwork) and can't get by anyone on the perimeter. He developed a nice spot up corner 3 and that's about it. I was trying to tell you all two years ago that the Bulls needed to gut everything but Lavine because no one else on the team was any good... they do exactly that and now they're good. Coincidence? I think not! Sexton hurt pretty good all year, didn't help him much.

If the Sox go out and sign a RF and a SP, or a 2B and a SP, or even a 2B and a RF for big money, I will have absolutely no problem with the Graveman move even though I still don't think he'll be very good for very long. The odds of that happening seem very very slim though. Edit; I'll also add everyone celebrating getting a GB pitcher and that being great for our park.... wuhhh? Did anyone watch LaRussa last year? The Sox need FB pitchers because their manager is a complete moron. Bummer got screwed by infield positioning and defense more than any pitcher I've ever seen in my life last year.

No, I wanted the White Sox to find an arm who may be prone for a breakout, or develop an arm who could find a new pitch or a new approach to take a next step. The Sox have invested so heavily in the bullpen in the last five years and they've whiffed almost every time but for Hendriks. They continue the same MO of buying at the peak instead of creating a peak themselves.

LOL, I've been called a Hahn Bot on this very site; Don Coopers son, Rick Hahn's Son and on and on. I have been blasted for being overly positive during the season (this past season), and about the players and after the season ended (after the post-season loss). DId you ever stop to think for one second that I just call it as I see it, and that I'm not negative or positive? My opinion doesn't change if the decision was made by a guy I like, or a guy I dislike. If I think a guy, Graveman, isn't that good I call it out. If I think a guy is really good, Grandal, I praise the move and get excited. This isn't that complicated. Everything doesn't fit in your bucket of positive and negative.

I'll b**** about the Sox paying for guys at their absolute peak value as long as they keep doing it. It will never stop being stupid; just as it was stupid for Kimbrel, it is stupid for Graveman. Find guys before their one breakout campaign, stop signing them after it. Just my thoughts. I'm not a fan of the sustainability of Graveman as a reliever. I could be wrong.

It's not over, but even by most optimistic payroll projections the Sox just spent about 20-25% of their off-season budget on a guy that I think will be lucky to have one full good season for the team.

Yes, most good/well run teams in contention lock up 25% of their payroll in their bullpen. How about bitching about the Sox making another big investment (by their standards) in a freaking bullpen arm when they have more pressing needs and aren't known as big spenders? Graveman's can be found/had/developed every year before they have their one breakout season. Maybe stop paying top of market prices for guys coming off career years?

1. The playoffs in 2021 were an anomaly due to the shortened season in 2020. Sp's faded down the stretch. Bullpens are important but a return to not having multiple bullpen games should be expected going forward. 2. None of those teams that performed well with good bullpens signed 3+ guys to big money bullpen contracts. Bullpen guys are volatile. Graveman has one good year as a reliever under his belt and even in that year he was the beneficiary of some luck. Fip was much higher than era and xera. Babip was 230. And he's 31 years old. I dont trust graveman one bit to be good for 3 years... not even 2.

Most teams find relievers on the cheap or development them. It's not a reliable position to lock in aging players coming off one good year doing it.

More big commitments to relievers. Hahn baffles me with his obsession with investing heavily in relievers coming off career seasons. Sox have big holes to fill and here they are buying more relief pitching. Smh

The guy who got the job directly out of FSU undergrad is still working with his team and has moved his way up quite a bit. And as for your second response, it's not really amazing given that the industry is a black hole of exploitation that only a very select few get out of the void, while the majority work long hours with very few guarantees, and no protection during a pandemic. The way baseball managed the pandemic was shameful given that they already exploit analysts and then kicked them to the curb instead of paying them the minuscule wages (in comparison to their skills and credentials) they were being paid. No, they have a better chance because many of the positions that exist are currently held by white people and psychology studies have shown us time and time again that people are more likely to hire people that LOOK like them, even if they don't believe they have any biases. You can read about this in "Nudge" or "Misbehaving" by behavioral economist Richard Thaler. You can also read about it briefly in "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahnman. It also explains, as I already explained, why the executive ratios in all industries do not equal the national population breakdown OR the college educated national breakdown. This isn't merely a race issue, it's also a gendered issue. Baseball isn't alone in this problem, although one could argue that nepotism is even more grotesque in baseball than it is in other industries.

Who says there aren't? Why do you assume that the promotion of minority hires into MLB only accounts for black people and not hispanic people or other people of non-white makeups? Also, how do Hispanics have three times the population? What data/numbers are you using to state that?

I know several people who broke into operations straight out of undergrad at places like FSU and Wisconsin - so I'd say your broad ranging proclamation is just not true. I also know several analysts/data science grads from local schools who went to work in analytics in baseball and left because of the treatment and layoffs during the pandemic coupled with the sub-par pay. Additionally it feels as though your belittling the idea that white people have a better shot by stating it's driven by resume and your whiteness didn't get you in either. Just as is the case in most gate-keeped industries, networking and knowing someone involved is more beneficial than any ivy league degree.

SeAt aT tHe tAbLe again!

Tell us more Portillos... er I mean Maloney.

I'm not a fan of a 39 year old coming off a serious injury; don't recover like you used to at that age, and is he on innings limit because of recovery? I wouldn't hate it like I hated Kimbrel, but it's not a great move imo.

He's been banged up a lot which would be the concern, but he's been worth 5.38 fWAR/162 in his career and he'll be 27 pretty much all of next year. To put that number in perspective, Machado had been worth roughly 5.28 fWAR/162 in his career prior to his contract and he was roughly the same age (I believe 2 months older). Obviously Machado had a better history of health, but Correa definitely should be in that ballpark. Also, Harper had been worth 5.28/162. Correa is really good.

Because you'd be a complete moron to let a team do a physical on you without a binding agreement. 1. Not all teams view physicals similarly and some have different requirements. 2. Why would you want a team you're not going to play for have your physical information?