Balta1701

http://m.mlb.com/glossary/injuries/forearm-flexor-tendinitis

1. Already had an elbow injury/pain during the playoffs last year. 2. Has incredibly few career innings, even compared to relief pitchers. 3. Throws exceedingly hard. 4. What pitcher isn't?

Yeah, if your owner is Jerry Reinsdorf and you trade away a potential superstar with 6+ years of control, your punishment is remaining the White Sox's GM for the next 5+ seasons. ?

Maybe part of the reason why is that teams 5-8 can't recruit at the same level as Clemson, Alabama, and Ohio State because 5 star prospects know that they have to go there to make the college playoff?

Sees Thibs trending on Twitter reads through.

To be fair, that writer doesn't mention anyone as pursuing Hendriks, it simply lists several relief pitchers who currently haven't had an active market.

Funded with $10 billion from the CARES act. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed Money for vaccine distribution and preparation was passed by the House in May of 2020 in the HEROES act but blocked by Mitch McConnell in the Senate until last week. With no money and little guidance from Federal authorities, it was left to the same state and local health departments who are overwhelmed processing tests and death certificates and who don’t have the resources to keep up with contact tracing for this huge number of cases to find the equipment and money to operate a vaccination program. It’s totally expected that slow going will be the result.

Would you do Crochet for Lux? That’s an interesting concept at least.

This was the post I was referencing. Notably a whole lot of people have suggested Madrigal in here, including a lot of mentions on the first 2 pages.

I mean in this thread it's been said the Pirates want a top-60 prospect or the equivalent for Musgrove..

I get it, but it's surprisingly closer than you think when you look at the stats isn't it? And when you write it as "we're trading all this stuff for Musgrove to avoid paying that modest sum", even moving Thompson and Adolfo doesn't sound particularly appealing. But that's what we're talking about.

Yeah, his 2019 was terrible, but his 2020 was better. Musgrove is more consistently a weaker pitcher but a healthier one, Smyly seems to have a higher ceiling. The reason I bring that up is that Smyly was signed for 1 year, $11 million, with the Braves paying a premium to get the guy they wanted signed early. Musgrove is $3.75 million this year, with a more expensive Arb-3 year next year. If you write the deal as "Thompson, Adolfo, + x for $15 million that could then be spent on a FA", I don't feel all that impressed by the concept, but at some level "we're trading for Musgrove because we're too cheap to sign a mid-level FA" is doing exactly that. Hence my statement 15 or so posts ago - if we're in such a financial mess that we can't go out and sign a Smyly for $12 million to give what Musgrove might give, we shouldn't be willing to trade multiple guys with multiple years of control for Musgrove, even if they're some distance away from the big leagues. We need to be hoarding years of control instead, because that's how we find the money to sign guys - by having guys on our team in their first 4-5 years, when they are extra cheap.

They play that game as a way of slightly lowering the total at the time, expecting that revenues will be higher and so $1 million in 2021 will hurt less than $1 million in 2013. Oops!!

We still don't have any details about him being rushed to Walter Reed in 2019.

Certainly not last year. Musgrove has definitely been more consistently healthy, but Smyly was notably better last year during the shortened outings including both of those stats.

The difference in apparent value between the two players you wrote first and the player you mention second...is pretty big.

Just curious about something...if you had to pick between Drew Smyly and Joe Musgrove, for next year alone to cover the White Sox's needs, can you make a strong argument for Musgrove? (and yes I know Smyly isn't available).

i know I've said this before...but a team operating with a stringent payroll limit like the White Sox...needs to be way more insistent on hoarding years of control.

After looking around for a couple days, it seems like people are genuinely scared by the UK one. In the UK, the available evidence seems to suggest that this strain has already jumped ahead of the other strain to become the dominant circulating variety in the London area in a period of only a couple weeks. Numbers are early again, but it looks possible that this variant is increasing symptoms and hospital admittances amongst younger age groups. If the "50% more transmissable" numbers implied by the 2 studies looking at it over the last month are right, then that's the difference between having an R value of 0.9 and 1.6 in the same area. So, if this variant is actually out there...then it's got a good chance of erupting.

I didn't have time to reply to these yesterday, but the question you asked in the first post is answered in your second post. How could they afford to not have him develop as a starter? Because "he may be able to help the team win a world series this year". That's exactly what could undermine any plans in the first, if you allow it. That's why the Papelbon example is relevant. Papelbon was a really good closer for them in 2006, would have been rookie of the year had it not been for Verlander. The Red Sox spent the entire offseason saying that they were going to make him a starter, as did he. That lasted...through March, 0 games into the season (http://mlb.mlb.com/content/printer_friendly/mlb/y2007/m03/d22/c1854433.jsp). That was it for really seriously talking about him as a starter, and they won the 2007 World Series. If you are going to develop him as a starter, there is a strong chance it costs you some games next year. Running a rookie out in a starters role, when you have to sometimes let him struggle while working on secondary stuff? Or having him throw innings in the minor leagues? Both of those could cost them a win or two.

Fair enough.

We did.

Courts won’t matter. But it’s worth considering that if the Republicans had the House, 2020 might have ended Democracy through this objection. Happy New Year. Maybe there should be a more explicit legal defense against that.