Jack Parkman

I didn't think that. Actually quite the opposite, and that those who make that comparison to the worst case scenario should be roasted accordingly, just like I got roasted in the NFL thread. All I was saying is that I don't blame people for making that assumption until the corresponding FO proves their competence in terms of scouting/player evaluation. But I do agree that it is ridiculous. In the NFL thread I said I knew it was ridiculous and I didn't care. I like sarcasm and was being a smart ass in that post. It was implied. Sorry if it wasn't clear. I will change it to Green text if we still use that for sarcasm.

Until this FO proves that they can identify their ass from a hole in the ground, people will assume the worst case scenario. Yet I caught a ton of flak for saying the same about Trubisky in the NFL Thread. Hmmm.

I just think it is more likely that a drafted QB slightly below average to a complete bust than it is that a drafted QB is good to great. Pace is a GM, it is his job to have a contingency plan. It seems to me he doesn't. If Kevin White isn't getting the majority of snaps at 2WR and Gabriel isn't in the slot (especially with Miller injured) then I don't know why he even made the team. He offers zero special teams value. Even if White showed a lot this year, it isn't like they'd be able to keep him around anyway, so I just wish they would move on, and if he takes off elsewhere, it wasn't going to happen here anyway. At that point it is what it is.

Yeah, but he hit .242 and got on base at a .306 clip. If he hit .310+ like I think Madrigal will, those numbers would be great. Sanchez had 49 walks. If Madrigal could hit .310+ with 40-50 walks and XBH numbers similar to Sanchez that is damn near his ceiling. I don't think that is out of the question. EDIT: Thanks to bmags for the 124 K stat as well.

I couldn't care less if Madrigal is hitting 5-9 HRs per year if he's hitting 30+ 2B and leading the league in 3B.

The thing to look for with both Madrigal and Rutherford in 2019 are their 2B, 3B, and OBP numbers. Both guys are probably maxing out at 12-15 HR, with 18-20 being an outside shot for Rutherford. I'd like to see 40 2B and 6-10 3B from Rutherford and 30 2B and 10+ 3B from Madrigal. Both should also get on base at .350+ clip in AA. Rutherford also needs to keep his BA in the .285+ range and Madrigal in the .310+ range.

Power doesn't only mean HRs. Obviously they help, but a hitter can still have a quality OPS hitting 15 HR per year if he has the power and speed to hit a lot of doubles and triples. If they're hitting 40-50 doubles and 6-12 triples, with 12-15 HR while getting on base at a .340+ clip, that is still a quality OPS. The Sox have two guys that probably fit this profile in the minors, and they are Madrigal and Rutherford.

To Clarify: The Mack trade was Awesome. Jason knows I was advocating acquiring him on Talkbears.com in early August. I have one major concern about it, and that is the lack of flexibility in the event that Trubisky sucks and you can't win enough games with him. They've used so much cap space and draft capital on this roster, that even if they wanted or had to get a different QB, whether via the draft or FA they couldn't do it. They're running the risk of wasting a top 3 defense in football. I guess that if Trubisky fails, nothing else matters anyway and everyone is shitcanned. What is concerning is this defense's prime is 2018-2020 and if Mitch doesn't show enough this year, they have to consider another option because they can't waste this defense. They don't have enough cap flexibility to do it if they had to, without completely punting on Trubisky. Even then it is iffy. Trubisky hadn't shown much, if anything to get excited about until 9/30/2018.

I've been pretty rational the majority of my time at Soxtalk. I went on a 2 month reactionary streak and I won't do it again. Frustration got the best of me. I needed to vent to someone, and I wanted to do it with fellow Sox fans. I didn't expect to get attacked like this for it. I used to post very rarely and keep quiet unless I had a well thought out, evidence based post. I changed that this year and I regret it. I'm going to post more often than in years past, but I'm going to damn well do my research again before posting gut feelings. WTF is the point of having this board if everything has to be all business all the time? People aren't allowed to get frustrated and vent? It isn't like I've been overly negative, in fact I've complained about that. As long as people don't spam threads and the board with b****ing about each and every minutia, then who cares? People should be allowed to show their frustration for a month or two without being attacked, ridiculed, tarred and feathered. I got so frustrated between the Sox and Bears that I questioned why I even cared about sports. Then I realized how much I enjoy them, even when times are tough. I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong and I have to follow my own advice about jumping to conclusions. I guess it took getting roasted in the NFL thread to realize how reactionary I've been over the last 2 months. I have to remember this guy before posting. I have him on saved attachments for a reason. Some of the trolls like WBWSF and Tom Longo can GTFO, but I don't think I've stooped to their level. If you guys think I have, then accept my apology. My posts about the Sox skipping town is a legitimate concern of mine and I think folks are naive to assume it will never happen. Most of the problem lies with ownership's philosophy that ignoring the Cubs existence is the best option, rather than taking them head on in trying to win the hearts of new fans. 3/5 seasons of 95+ losses and 25 years of incompetence at the most important position in sports can get the best of anyone. Peace, Parkman

It's ok to be skeptical, but just to assume everything is or isn't going to work based on gut feeling is nonsense. I've learned it is best to not be reactionary and let the process play out. OTOH, this regime hasn't proven that they can identify their ass from a hole in the ground, so I kind of understand those who preach doom and gloom. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.

They changed it since I posted that.

If Rutschman performs that well again, one of two things will happen: Either 1) he goes top 2 or 2) he doesn't because most view him as a 1B because he's such a good hitter and he goes mid-late 1st because nobody wants to pick a 1B that high, and teams feel his usefulness will be hampered by the physical demands of C.

Crap, I forgot what day it was. I thought today was Tuesday. LOL.

Gray pitched Saturday, so he'd be on 3 days rest. Who else would they go with? EDIT: Rockies are going with Senzatela. Not much better. I'd take even old fart Lester over anyone the Rockies could throw out there.

Looking like Cubs/Rockies. I don't like the matchup of Gray vs Lester for the Rockies. If Colorado is to eliminate the Cubs tomorrow, they're going to have to win a slugfest and torch Lester.

All of the 1st rounders from the last 2 drafts will at least be starters for a while, IMO. That includes Trubisky. Watson is probably the most iffy of the bunch. He has some accuracy problems. I think it isn't a question though that the 2018 QB class might be a lot better as a group than the 2017 class. Just more upside there. It seems that teams are getting a lot better at drafting QBs. I can't think of a lot of 1st rounders over the last 3-4 seasons that absolutely suck. Goff, Wentz, Trubisky, Mahomes, Watson, Mayfield, Darnold and Rosen are the future of the league.

Stan Marsh: Wow, Jay Cutler. My dad says you suck, but you might be good one day. Cutler:Thanks. Replace Cutler with Trubisky and Parkman with Randy Marsh and that summed up my feelings about #10

Not afraid to take the Ls, so let's move on. You guys think I know my stuff though, right? I've been posting here long enough to prove I'm not an idiot. A lot of time I'll admit when I'm being reactionary ahead of time so you guys know. Sometimes, I'll just say stuff and that is it. A lot of time I'll change my opinions when new data is presented, because that is how the scientific method works. You have to adjust to what the data that is presenting.

Not arguing that, I shouldn't have made overreaching judgments, that is true. Before this game would it have been better if I said that Mitch hadn't shown anything yet, he may still do so but I'll believe it when I see it. Most of my argument was that I assume Bears QBs suck until proven otherwise. I was advocating that the Bears trade for Mack back in early August. I also thought that 1 1st round pick would have been enough because it was likely to be a top 10 pick.

Football is a reactionary sport. There are 16 games in a season, and there is a week to ruminate on a game before they play again. It was too early to make a final judgment one way or another, but I was going of the data set that I had, which admittedly was incomplete. I'm not afraid to admit being wrong. I've written a couple posts on it. I hadn't seen that one game where Trubisky showed what he can do at the NFL level. This was that game. The rest of the 15 games looked like meh.

I'm not complaining. There are lots of reasons for optimism currently. I get that coming out flat sometimes happens, but it shouldn't happen against crap teams.

I'm not arguing, but there is no excuse for them coming out flat last week.

Yeah, they looked horrible last week against a crap team on the road. They were lucky to win that game. I was arguing that if Mitch sucks, they could end up regretting that trade and wasting Mack's prime. Jury's still out, but at least now there is reason for optimism, where before today Mitch was meh at best.

I've always said, It all depends on #10. If he can do half of what he did today on a regular basis, it will be a wonderful trade. it's all about the QB. /angelo

Wrigley. Cubs won H2H.