southsider2k5

Again, that is a super definitive statement that I have yet to see any back up for, especially with as many injuries as we have seen in this system this year, including top guys.

You build a roof which opens up to the sklyline. Houston is a great example of it.

Do you really believe we are separating these guys into haves and have nots as to what we are doing with them? Do you have any actual support for that?

But those aren't the only guys we are working with. We literally just did alterations to both Schultz and Hagen Smith, who are in the Sale type league of arm talent.

And most importantly almost all of these guys turn their turns almost every single time.

Man the wind just killed that one.

Eventually you have to throw him in the deepend if you want a chance at him learning the game.

The E parade begins.

Which is sadly still more than most of the roster.

The name calling has ended. No more.

Left hamstring tightness.

We are two innings in and it is tied 2-2.

Nothing either way as of yet.

But you lose guys like Chris Sale too. Dude got 36 starts from 2019 to 2023 with the Red Sox. It was 11 if you subtract out 2019. And then you still have to find someone to cover those other starts. The Dodgers do this with guys like Kershaw pitching half a season for a LONG time now. They are willing to spend $150 million to get Glasnow for half a season. That can't be us.

So if the Sox got say Tyler Glascow out of Chris Sale because he was incredible, but hurt half of the year, that was better?

I honestly wonder if keeping good guys healthy is being extremely undervalued here. Is what the White Sox got out of Chris Sale better than the Red Sox who saw his stuff tick up, but lost him for long stretches? Then the Red Sox had to drop to the next option to fill in for Sale, meaning an even bigger drop-off. If we have to sign six Mike Clevingers off of the street to cover our injuries is that worth getting an extra tick or two in a shortened season from guys like Davis Martin?

The thing that I come back to is that outside of our overall talent level, it hasn't felt like pitching talent was significantly underproducing the equivalent talent vs what other teams were seeing with similar guys. It's not like any of those guys left here and unlocked something we didn't either.

If you don't have solid samples, you can't build predictive models which should be giving you ideas of what to change towards. If you aren't, I am not sure what you are using the data for?

If we aren't looking for advantages, what are we using data and changing deliveries on the basis of? There is obviously there is SOMETHING we are looking to change TO. Shouldn't we be looking for the same sorts of things in others?

I would hope this was already a focus honestly, otherwise why do analytics if you can't identify the guys to stay away from?

Nah, he just gets his contacts to do this for him. The Robert work ethic stories have already been doing the rounds, and will only pick up after he is dealt, just like we did to the rest of them. The fans eat it up and forget who this all keeps happening under.

And this goes back to my original point in that if we are following along in increasing our injury numbers and having more bad pitchers pitch a lot more bad games, this isn't moving us forward. If we aren't going to maintain a roster like the Dodgers do where we are willing to sign a ton of guys, we might actually being losing ground by not having our pitchers going at a slightly lower rate, but making sure they are on the mound 33 starts a year like we used to.

And hopefully the rest of MLB joins the Sox.

That's great. If we aren't going to be the LAD Dodgers and sign a 60 player roster, we don't have the depth to pitch over a Dodgers level of injuries.