Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 08:30 PM) A lot of this was also Jerry being cheap. Example- we didn't pony up for Cespedes, we signed scrap heap guys like Jackson, Latos, and Rollins, and well, yeah. I don't think the answer is "Jerry being cheap". The answer more en-lies that given where we stand within the city of Chicago and where the fan base is as a whole, we have certain payroll constraints. Some years you can push past them, but there are real constraints that limit how you can go about building your team. We can't play financially with the biggest boys, but outside of those 5 or 7 teams, we can play with the rest payroll wise (some years on the higher side, some years slightly lower, but we can play). That said, there is a big drop off between the top tier spenders and the lower tiers and as a result, the options to build your team are more limited and if you do what the Sox did, it is almost impossible not to "half ass" it (i.e., give yourself a chance, but a, only if things work out as planned to better then planned across the board). Not saying a total miracle but most of your players are at expectations with a few performing over expectations (minimal injuries, etc).

QUOTE (Dunt @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 02:55 PM) They finished 16.5 games out of first in their division, what the f*** is this dude talking about? What do you want him to say. He is saying all the right things from a players perspective. He wants to contend and he wants to stay here. Doesn't mean he will, but would you rather him say, we can't do it, we are terrible and I hope management goes in a totally different direction? Why would he say that? By all accounts Frazier is a good teammate, that said, I'm tired of consistently seeing the articles from our team leaders about how ignore last year, we will do better this year and absolutely have the talent. We've consistently underperformed expectations (on paper) for a long time and it has largely been due to veterans not playing good enough or missing the mark. It happens in baseball, but I feel like for us it has been at a much greater percentage.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) There you go. Cutler's taken a big enough step back this year that they cannot conceivably say they will be a competitive team for a playoff spot with him next year, and you can't tell me that there's enough talent on the offensive side of the ball to make up for having to run a rookie QB out there a-la Dallas this year. The Bears look like they're going to have to be on the Titans/Jags/Bucs/Rams path next year of spending several years working a QB up, and they don't have the talent around that position to carry the QB spot. The defense is already on the top half of the league despite a ton of injuries. You have some young players emerging and a pass rush that is showing improvement. The defense is much better today than it was when Fangio inherited the mess. Add some more pieces via draft & free agency, plus see internal development from existing guys, and no reason this defense couldn't potentially emerge into a top 10 defense as soon as next year (not saying it will...just that it very much could). That is the type of team that is a "playoff contender" with a solid QB. Hell, Hoyer could even be that guy, but lets say Cousin's wants out of Washington or you go more stop gap and take an old Romo (I presume denver will be after him hard), you most definitely could win with Romo (if he's healthy) all while buying more time for your QB to develop. My answer to all of this would be different if you had a Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning type QB sitting there and you had the #1 overall selection. That type of slam dunk QB isn't in this draft. Please note, that it doesn't mean a QB as good as them if not better isn't in this draft, it just means that the easy pick isn't there, which means you could be using the pick on a total waste and end up spending 3 years waiting for that player to be good, changing coaches, and then starting all back and over. I don't know what I'd do and a lot of it depends on what the front office thinks about the various QB's, but if I have a lot of doubt, I'm not taking one with the top 3 picks no matter how big my needs are, I'd trade down, add assets, take a QB who falls with a 2nd round pick (or even 3rd rounder) or two QB's and would make the push for the veteran QB who allows me to buy time (and not put all of my "eggs" in one basket). All of this is fact and circumstance based, but I don't know any talent evaluator who thinks any of this QB's is a consensus #1 overall pick.

Rumors pointing to Arenas coming back as the interim coach. Not sure if he would be the head coach again or if they would look another direction. As someone who backed Klinsmann for a long time, I think the timing was right to make this move.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 12:30 PM) jon greenberg ‏@jon_greenberg 43m43 minutes ago Leonard Floyd is in the concussion protocol, but no serious neck injury, John Fox said. This is fantastic news. Concussion is still serious, but far better then any alternative I could have imagined. I presumed he was going to be done from the year. Not that the how it happened was the same, but I had visions of Johnny Knox after Floyd was carted out.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 01:11 PM) I guess I dont see any of this turmoil. I see a team with very little talent rebuilding through the draft and a few signings. I see a team that needs at least 3 good drafts to be competitive. I think we are a good draft and FA away from being a playoff team. This isn't to say that we should be expected to be a playoff team, but I think if we were able to find the right QB, upgrade our CB / Safety, and get continued development out of our young players (plus add a few more good ones), we are a playoff team. Now the QB comment is the major if. If we instead are going to take a young QB early and start him quickly, then I agree the process will take a bit longer. Three years is just too long (that would be 5 total years of rebuilding and in the NFL, that just isn't acceptable). That said, I agree they inherited a giant mess.

QUOTE (shipps @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 12:17 PM) I think many expected to see some development and some execution in their plan. As it stands now, Pace and Fox are divided. They appear to never have been on the same page. So many injuries, the appearance that there is no order in the org, no one on the same page, people pointing fingers and blame passing and when pretty much everything that could have gone wrong has gone wrong makes people a bit uneasy. A rebuild is one thing but when you lay the new foundation and start putting the bricks up again only to see things crumble from the get go is a whole different story. Technically that appearance is given from the outside...I don't know what Fox & / or Pace have done to contribute to that appearance. I haven't seen us take players and then the other part of the regime through them under the bus or vice versa. I think a lot of the angst, clearly is due to our performance (that said, I actually think the cup is more full then empty now vs. two years ago and we actually have had a fantastic draft this year...assuming Floyd's injury doesn't impact his career) but another piece has to be tied to the fact that the media flat out doesn't like Fox. They don't like his non-answers and how coy he is and they don't like how they shielded and prevented media axis. By and large the Chicago media has been generally anti-Fox every since he shut them down in the first training camp. Fox isn't perfect and Pace isn't, but right now I've seen enough from Pace that I'm okay letting him run this show. If Pace never wanted Fox and is ready to move on, I give him that chance, because player development wise, outside of the White pick (which who would know he'd get hurt), in general, I like who we have gotten via the draft. Sure, we should have taken a QB, but Howard, Whitehair and Floyd all look like impact players who are coming from this years draft (the first one where him and his entire team were in place...last year we had to leverage the old regime / processes and even then last years draft, outside of our top pick being an injury bust, isn't a bad one (doesn't help that Goldman has the same injury bug). This years is clearly better then last years though and in FA, I like what we did this off-season. Hicks was a nice piece who should be part of a longer term trend and I didn't see any huge / wasteful moves via FA. This process is going to take time, but I think if we did go the route to draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round and signed a Romo, we'd find out that we will contend sooner then people expect. If we force the hand and take whomever is best with our 1st pick (whether we believe in that QB or not)...than we shall see, cause if we get a Goff, we could be in much worse shape.

To answer the question, I don't care the style as long as we play winning baseball. All I want to see on the southside is winning baseball, but if we are going to lose in the process, please let it be with young players who we see a future with, vs. because our veterans continue to let us down, etc. Give me losses with some hope vs. losses with little to no hope (which is what the last few years have been).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 08:12 AM) Yeah, I mean I guess the point is that if a significant part of Bregman's value is tied to his ability at SS, then you either need to be willing to move Anderson off SS or else value Bregman as 2B or 3B. You don't want to hurt his value or overpay for him if he doesn't represent that value to you. Or you need to get a 3rd team involved and move Bregman for someone who is a better overall fit for your team (if you do in fact think his value is tied to SS). I also tend to think Anderson is most valuable at SS. That isn't to say it can't work cause obviously you can have one at 2B or do something else. I don't think this is the case for Bregman though (in the sense that he needs to stick at SS).

By the way, amazing what a year brings. Our overall PG play is still sub-par, but our depth is so good. Canaan is really solid off the bench as is MCW and I think Valentine will finish the season as good, if not better then any of them. Plus there is Grant who has flashed, but also struggled at times. Either way, a much better spot then we had been in past years. Too bad it took this long to address it (cause it wasn't like we didn't have a few year run where we had a starting PG who was made of glass). I'm hoping all of the young guards pay a lot of attention to what they can learn from Papa Wade.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 09:17 AM) Loggains has no idea how to call a consistent offensive game. He just abandons the run game in the second half every f***ing time. Howard gets like 70 to 100 yards in the first half of just about every game he starts and then disappears in the second half. Although dude needs to work with the jugs machine They mentioned Howard had an eye injury that could have been impacting his depth perception. Think I saw that in a Haugh piece. Either way, bad use of hands for Howard, who looks like a beast on the field. I do think part of what happened was our entire oline was a wreck and we literally had no one to stretch the field, so it becomes extremely difficult to even run the ball in those circumstances. My stance on who our coach should be long term is changing. If we bring in a veteran QB (say a Romo or even a Jimmy G), then I am okay with Fox. If we are going to go with a young QB that we draft, I want a new head coach and I say that more because I want to ensure whomever we draft is going to be here for a few years and they will be in the same system and get that continuity that is deserving. If we think Fox is the guy, fine, but that means we can't have a turnstyle of offensive coordinators in the future. And I still think Fox should work out, but Loggains is hard to judge. He grew on me as the season went on, but has clearly lost some momentum, that said, when you actually analyze who is on the offensive roster at this point (especially after Miller's injury), you can see why it would be a struggle to do much offensively.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 05:20 PM) I heard something about a couple popular guys from Texas (San Antonio, maybe?) that people were excited about. Can't remember the names though. It'd be a gamechanger if Texas was actually in play during an election. Popovich and Cuban?

I'm jealous. Looks awesome shack. Been back on the court each of the past couple weeks (after a long hiatus) and just seeing that makes me want to go back out and shoot right now.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 08:59 AM) Did you see the play on Saturday where Rondo blew right by his man and had a clear lane to the hoop, and then passed it out to Portis at 3 point range, who was immediately guarded? It was infuriating, Bulls needed a bucket then too. Yeah - And quite a few more of those type of plays. At least a few handfuls a day.

I hope everything is alright with Floyd. These injuries are brutal. With all these injuries, especially the fact that 3/5th's of our oline is out and now our top 3 opening day receiving options are all out too (suspension & injuries), it is going to be pretty tough to do much anything offensively. It does mean Meredith and Wilson and other young options (including our young TE) will get some developmental time (not sure I should count Wilson, but I will). Defensively, Its good to know that Floyd is okay, now I just hope the injury isn't serious from the football sense. I'm finally facing the fact that with all these injuries, we are going to have a hard time winning many more games this year. I give the team credit for battling with the Giants on the road all day though.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 20, 2016 -> 08:50 PM) Brutal last three minutes of this game Yeah, they almost completely blew it. Thankfully they didn't. Both games were very fun watches though. Yes, Bulls blew the Clippers game, but there was a lot of good basketball played as well on both nights. Clearly we aren't a championship team with Rondo at the point. My big question is whether Hoiberg and his staff can actually develop and get people better, cause I see a lot of the same from young players who have been with him for a full season now. Doug is clearly better (but I think that is more on the fact that he is healthy and allowed to get minutes), but Niko and Portis are kind of the same players they have always been.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 19, 2016 -> 09:44 PM) Man. Still don't like Rondo. Not sure Hoiberg does either. Rondo was absolutely brutal on Saturday and Sunday. That said, both of those games were extremely fun to watch. I don't know why we didn't have Butler have the rock more yesterday. He looked like he could score on every single possession. Lakers had no one who could guard him. Valentine is going to be a player. Has a smoothness to his game. Not saying all pro or something, but he's going to be a good pro. Rondo needs to assert himself offensively because right now he's passing up too many good looks and then by doing so, putting our offense in a worse spot (I realize he can't shoot, but these are shots that should be high percentage even for him). Rondo will be gone at the end of the year anyway when we try to lure Chris Paul.

Good win on the road though. They turned it up in the third and a good chunk of the fourth before Utah made its run. There is something about Balentine that I really like. Looks so damn smooth on the court. I think he's going to be a pretty darn solid pro.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 03:35 PM) He looked awful with the Dodgers. Looked way skinnier and no bat speed You don't just produce like he did for the first half with Oakland and stink. You have injuries / other things.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 03:16 PM) This pretty much confirms a White Sox rebuild. They have loved McCann and would have topped that return if they were going for it. Excellent point. That whole deal was the type of deal the Sox would have done had they been under their strategy of the past two years, especially given our need at catcher and their overall fondness for McCann.

4yrs and roughly 50M. That seems like a very reasonable deal.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 02:30 PM) Totally agree. As for rest, really need sox scouting to come through. In July, had we traded sale for Sanchez + from yankees, we would have thought a weaker return than boston packages. But then he hits 20 hrs in 2 months. Sox need to hit if they go any lower than top guys to get a higher return of quantity. I love that you bolded that post. When I was writing that I almost wanted to bold it because I get so tired of the argument, well, the Cubs had this or that or we don't want to be the Pirates or the Royals for 20 years. All of those things are true and if our scouts and front office miss, they miss. End of the day there is a bit of luck to all of these deals, especially when it comes to prospects, but hey, the last eight years have sucked and we should have a pretty damn good starting point if we do get big packages for a few of these guys.

This is one of the things I don't fully grasp about WAR. How did Alex Avila put up a 1 WAR in 57 games vs. McCann's .9 WAR in 130 games? All while Mccann posted a slightly higher (albeit miniscule) OPS. Presume park factor played some effect in it (since NY's stadium is a haven to left handed hitters). It isn't like one is a gold glove defender and the other is the worse defensive catcher in baseball either, so I just don't get it (especially given how WAR is a counting stat).

I'd be ecstatic, because I think it would be the Sox front office taking us in the direction we need to be. That said, I will miss Chris Sale the pitcher and will think back and wonder how we weren't able to put a competitive team around a core of guys that are really fantastic. Not a lot of teams have the type of high production, low contract talent that we have. Just happens to be the areas where we don't have talent, we really don't have talent. Combination of an all star team and a AA/AAA team.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) Yeah, I hope they are both light too, but I'm trying to respect what some of the analytics folks are saying in regards to the value of the top tier prospects. The struggle I have is, if we move Sale and Q, that is two elite players we are moving and you have to know that the probability of an elite prospect being anywhere near as good as Q / Sale is just impossible. That means to pull a deal and have a decent probability of success, you need to get quite a bit of quality and quantity in the equation. Obviously for Sale we should get higher quality, but if we don't get enough quantity, then the opportunity for a deal to really make the club better (since it isn't like trading Sale / Q gives us a ton of additional payroll space to work with) becomes a lot less likely. Realistically we have three guys who can bring a kings ransom of talent, with Sale being the most likely to actually get teams to garner up what it takes. Eaton and Q get undervalued to some extent, although Q's track record is so strong that I think his undervalue is still something that ultimately makes sense for the Sox long-term strategy. I don't know that anyone will give up enough to make moving Eaton make sense (and quite frankly, I don't see the Sox front office moving this far, as they could always see where they were and deal Eaton later). Then you have more of your Frazier / Robertson / Melky types who don't fit long-term, but won't bring anything super good, although I would say we should be able to get a top 100 guy plus some solid pieces for Frazier / Robertson. All three of these guys aren't necessarily bad guys to keep around (as they provide good veteran presences for a rebuilding team) who you can then flip closer to the deadline for probably similar value as what you would get today, barring injury (especially Robertson, who I think we'd be selling "low" on now). Frazier, I have no problem moving him and think we can get a package relatively similar (albeit slightly less valuable) then what we gave up. Again, none of those are going to be elite type prospects, although you never know who you might hit on, but we most certainly could get a piece or two that becomes a long term positive contributor to the team. Nate Jones is a wildcard because he has value and a nice contract, but given his health concerns, you could look at moving him and he could again bring in some real talent. The thing that makes us interesting is, despite being so bad, we have some players who can command quite the haul and really quickly stock our cupboards to the point that if we executed some good trades, on paper, we'd have the best farm system in baseball...of course you don't win on paper, but we'd at least have a different type of team to watch and a longer term view of being able to add payroll to get the right parts (and leverage existing talent to potentially fill organizational holes). I truly believe Hahn and Kenny have an opportunity to do things right. People think of the Cubs "tanking", well the Cubs didn't have pieces like Sale / Q / Eaton (plus to a lesser extent Jones / Frazier / Robertson / Abreu / Melky) when they started the tanking whom they could move to significantly boost their farm system. Shark was really the only guy that they had and they clearly took advantage of that (and of course they did get lucky with Arrieta). So for those who say, well they spent more internationally or via free agency, well us having a better starting point to potentially inject the roster with talent is a major plus in the White Sox favor. Not many teams get the advantage of starting a rebuild (if we go down that path) by leveraging the type of youngish, dynamic talent we already have to give you so many young, talented prospects. It is also why it is so darn unfortunate that we screwed up so badly in having enough of a system / smart enough FA moves to actually build a competitive team around them. Unfortunately, we half-assed it for too long to the point that it was impossible to have enough depth as an organization to surround our upper echelon talent with enough "quality" major league players.