southsider2k5

I will die on this hill.

I would love to have better subjects to talk about, but it IS objectivity accurate to be able to point to past performance as a reasonable expectation of future performance. Just because it isn't good in most cases doesn't make it wrong. If and when those things improve, so will the level of expectations. For example when it was established last year that Colson had problems hitting velocity last year, it shouldn't be a surprise that him not hitting fastballs this year gets noticed. It's not unreasonable.

You are in for a long few years if you are expecting this level of discourse on a message board with this team. Honestly, that didn't even exist in 2005, let alone now. You can keep the lectures about how we should be thinking and posting, as gaslighting is exactly what that is.

No. It really doesn't add up with what we know about them.

From the guy building a Chicagoland house worth more than the most expensive contract in Chicago history? The guy who had a company with a Chicago HQ? You have more confidence that he is going to move the team, than he is going to try to spend to win at a rate appreciably ahead of the current ownership structure? I don't know what a German soccer club, the NHL, or the NFL have to do with that, but I will flat out say there is more vision for what an Ishiba led ownership group would look like than say a Dave Stewart one, or frankly any other owner we have no history from.

A top 3 pick in 2026.

Can we at least not pretend that most of these concerns aren't directly due to either previous concerns over a particular player, or the fact that this was literally the worst team in the history of MLB, and people don't need to be gaslit for remember that?

My problem with that is that if the Sox STILL can't fix flawed hitters with talent, this rebuild isn't going anywhere, anyway. Right now they are loaded with flawed hitters with minimal talent all over this roster. Let the fans say what they want, and lord knows what they will, but the Sox should be finding ceilings while they have time to play anyone and everyone. No more 35 year old utility guys who can't hit or field.

The 1998 White Sox won 39 more games than the 2024 White Sox.

Well sort of. 28 other teams didn't trade for him, but we have no idea how many claimed him. Mets could have jumped the line with cash.

Look, I get doubt, but we literally have their history in Phoenix as an example of their own behavior.

WhAt WiLl ThE PlAyErS sAy If He DoEsN't EaRn ThE JoB?

Any structure like that has a survivorship outline that details how those kinds of changes happen. While they might not replace regular board seats, they have no choice but to replace the head. I mean in theory they could have left it open, but I really don't see a scenario where they didn't account for the death (or whatever disqualifying events may be in the deal)of the chairman.

That sound.

I am sure that is all outlined in the survivorship section of the agreement.

OMG

Why screw up a perfect thing?

AJ and I are on the same page with the Cubs. There might not be a bigger con artist in baseball than the Ricketts ownership group crying poor with like $50 million a season in ON book profits.

The bright side is that after last year, the Sox don't have much of an audience to lose.

The hope is that Dutch Schultz will soon arrive in Chicago and remedy the situation.

That's fine, but stick with him. Don't send him to Siberia for a bad couple of weeks. The guy needs to be playing 5 days a week.

That is almost impossible to do in real life, yet it is 100%.

Now we know why Jerry wouldn't give up his favorite player, Mr Considerations. It's his top prospect.

This would be my expectation, but no one has ever actually said it outloud as a fact.