witesoxfan

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 02:43 PM) I'm actually kind of surprised about the cocaine. I always thought that had sort of come and gone in the mainstream. I used to have it offered to me a lot at parties and other things, but it's been at least 15 years since I have actually seen it around. I did play on a rec softball team with an emergency room nurse. She once said they can tell if you have done coke one time in your life if they look at some xray or something. Supposedly even just once, you get some sort of phlem accumulating around your heart. I was always afraid I might like it, that's why when offered I always said no. After hearing this, I was too scared. I have never actually seen it, but I could have easily gotten involved with it. Anybody who has gone to college and partied to any extent could find it if they really wanted. Like you, I was afraid that I'd like it too much and that it'd be a tailspin from there.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 02:45 PM) His stats tell everything in his first season in the majors. OK, please judge all our prospects the same way. Oh wait, Davidson I guess is old at 26. I can understand only being excited about the prospects, but I stand by what I say if he hits 30 home runs that is a very very nice figure for a first-year player. Obviously i forgot about Judge and some of the other rookies in saying he's rookie of the year if he gets to 30 hrs, but my gosh I can't understand the double standard on here. I guarantee you if Rutherford hits 30 home runs his first year or Robert or any one of our darling prospects people will overlook the bad statgeek categories and only praise the prospect and Hahn. It's all up to Davidson to help me out here, get up to 30 home runs instead of staying stuck at 21 the final eight weeks. Greg, remember Josh Fields? He came up as a rookie in 2007 in what was a lost year for the Sox and slugged 23 homers in 100 games. Over 600 plate appearances, that would have been around 33 homers. It was a slightly better offensive environment 10 years ago, but he came with similar red flags - not a ton of walks, higher strikeout rate, a low average, mediocre defense, not much speed. He ended up becoming irrelevant very quickly because he couldn't make the adjustments necessary as well as some issues dealing with the environment of a big league clubhouse. Hell, Chris Carter for the Brewers (and former Sox farm hand) led the National League in home runs last year. The Brewers didn't even offer him a contract this past winter because his flaws are so pronounced. Point being, a counting number might be "sexy" but it could be very, very empty. If a slap hitter puts up a .300 average, that's good! But let's add context - he doesn't walk, he doesn't hit for power, and doesn't steal bases, and he doesn't play the field very well. So we're looking at a guy who is putting up a .300/.330/.370 line. That kind of player has value, but it's better served as a bench piece. You get a flawed player who still adds value to the team. Everything needs context. Simply saying "if x-player hits y homers, people will be celebrating" is absolutely wrong. If said player does it with a good average, good plate discipline, and good defense, then absolutely, they will be singing praise. If it's a 30 homer season with a low average, not many walks, a ton of strikeouts, mediocre defense, and no discernible speed on the basepaths, people are going to be very cautious moving forward with that player.

QUOTE (Señor Ding-Dong @ Jul 28, 2017 -> 08:30 PM) Also, I think it'd be relatively easy to deduce who the writer of the article's source is, as you can narrow it down by players who retired after last season who was with 3 different orgs during their career. How many players retire each year anyway? Probably not a ton. Once you figure him out, you can likely narrow down the "rookie infielder" from the lede sentence, as well as the current all-star. I tried to research it for about 20 minutes. I think they intentionally used misleading information knowing that you'd be able to figure it out. There was no one that really fit the bill.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 11:22 AM) I thought you could only send one player below AA. Is that still true? Also, are there any restrictions preventing a player participating multiple times? I know Jimenez, Collins, & Kopech all attended last year, so not sure if they're eligible again or not. Yes. Don't see any restrictions about those 3 playing. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/events/winterleague...;id=player_elig

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 02:09 PM) Nope. We did much better but Q is a better pitcher. With more team control. Hahn did about as well as he possibly could have.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 12:44 PM) Totally, but my comment was directed at the fans. Whether or not the team was running on fumes, there was zero excitement in that ball park, other than the Tigers fans. The Sox were in still first place and it felt like a September 2016 game. I have looked at the fanbase differently since then. When they beat Detroit in that makeup game to go up 3 games with 16 left, I felt great, like they finally got over that hump. Detroit made up 6 games in the span of 16 games, which is pretty incredible.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 01:10 PM) Phillies up 5-0, going for a 4-game sweep of the Braves. If they win, the Giants move up to #1. They begin a 4-gamer with the A's tonight. Just amazing to me how bad the Giants have been this season. Like everything that could have gone wrong for that team has gone wrong.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 01:11 PM) Yeah, I don't get anyone expecting Holland to be traded. His last 10 starts have been every bit as bad as James Shields' starts with the White Sox. If the White Sox were actually trying to win, he would have been waived by now. I would say he would have been waived July 9th, heading into the ASB. His numbers were actually OK in his first 10 starts of the year, even if it was apparent there was a lot of smoke and mirrors going on. He's been awful beyond that. Unless he finds a way to increase his velocity or he moves to the bullpen, I'd say he's gone the way of John Danks. Danks had just turned 31 when the Sox gave him his pink slip, and he hasn't been back in the majors since. Derek Holland turns 31 in October.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) This seems to be sort of common with guys. You see them get released and then signed to a minor league deal just as a formality to take them off the 40-man. It's something they would talk about and agree to first before just doing it (if the Sox even want to that is). And that's the key. I don't have the exact number in front of me, but they've brought in close to 10 new pitchers, and I see them being very active on the minor league free agent market as well, as said minor leaguers will see the Sox as an opportunity to get a chance in the majors. They may want to focus their time on developing the pitchers they have in house as opposed to rehabbing a reliever on the wrong side of 30 who has a tendency of getting injured as soon as he gets healthy. He's not a bad pitcher though, and he's not taking up a roster spot, so I don't know what to think exactly.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) This is accurate. There comes a point where everyone either has to be on the 40 man roster, or officially /released/DFA'd/non-tendered. The disabled lists don't open up until very late into spring training. Instead of taking up a spot where either we could claim someone from a team looking to create roster room, or someone would could be a Rule 5 pick, I think Putnam goes. When you look at his situation along with the White Sox situation, it doesn't make much sense to pay him to hold up a roster spot for one year of control. Yep, this is how I see it too. He's out until 2019, and come 2019 I think the Sox will be looking more towards actually fielding a competitive team, even if it's not quite there. Can you really count on a guy coming off Tommy John who has never shown a propensity towards staying healthy? And even if they aren't competitive enough, what are you going to get for a 32 year old injury-prone reliever set for free agency? I could see non-tendering and signing a minor league contract, but I think he'd prefer to take an opportunity elsewhere. I'm also not Zach Putnam, and he's actually been successful with the Sox and never anyone else, so maybe he'd be interested in that, having the Sox organization look after him during his recovery.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jul 31, 2017 -> 09:35 AM) He's on the 60 day DL. He's not taking up a spot on the 40 man. He will in the offseason though.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 10:21 PM) There's no way in hell Royals would put Saladino at short over Escobar. That's ridiculous. There's no way in hell the Royals would start Migo or Holland. They are never that despearate. Melky? Yeah they'd probably take him. I'd try to rob them and get the disappointing Starling. Trade Melky and Tito Polo for Starling. Holland would probably be great for them. Great defensive team, big ballpark. And Melky would help alleviate the Gordon concern. I'd have no problem dealing both to the Royals for a modest return.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 30, 2017 -> 02:10 AM) Yea that 2015 team was absolutely dreadful and they still won 76 games. Next year's Sox team can easily be better than them by accident. Trayce Thompson was 3rd on that team in WAR among position players. THIRD! I know WAR is not a perfect stat but that is nuts. That team would've killed to have one player on the farm who was even on Nicky Delmonico's level, and this Sox system now has a whole bunch of guys like that. They may not be able to find starpower like Chris Sale, but they should be able to field a more well rounded club than that trainwreck. That team won 76 games with the worst offensive team in the league, by far. You know how? Because they had Adam Eaton putting up 3.7 WAR on offense (which was more than the rest of the non-pitcher players combined (though that is slightly cherry picked: Jose Abreu put up 0.3 fewer WAR than the rest of the White Sox non-pitcher players combined too - truly stars and scrubs)). That team received negative contributions from Carlos Sanchez (-0.1, 420 PAs), Leury Garcia (-0.2, 15 PAs), Rob Brantly, Melky Cabrera, JB Shuck, Micah Johnson, Alexei Ramirez, Emilio Bonifacio, Mike Olt, Avisail Garcia, Conor Gillaspie, and Adam LaRoche. WAR is not an exact statistic, like home runs, but it is relevant, and those players mentioned were able to put up somewhere around -6 WAR combined. The reason that team won 76 games was because they put up 20.6 WAR as a pitching staff. They had a good pitching staff! They had two great starters and three league average starters. They had Robertson in the bullpen. And that was it. Now, take out Sale, Quintana, Robertson, and Eaton from that equation. Those guys combined for approximately 17-18 WAR. Subtract some here or there. That 2015 Sox team, without those 4, is absolutely terrible. If you are going to use WAR as an exact as taking wins out of the win column - which I suggested once upon a time (and is not unreasonable), but something I do not agree with - then you are looking at a team that was going to win *[drumroll]* 60 games. In other words, no, you're wrong.

QUOTE (2005thxfrthmmrs @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 06:02 PM) To say they are losing on purpose is where you're mistaken. Players are still competing and giving their best effort (they are still playing for their next contract mind you), and competing on a game by game basis. Whether they are winning or losing next year is irrelevant because we know the team is only going to get better when rest of the core arrives. This post is awesome. Consider playing one on one basketball with your older brother, or you and two of your friends playing three on three with older players. You will lose. What did you learn from losing? If you learned that losing sucks and you don't want to play anymore, then you will no longer play. If you learned that you had fun and you want to do better to beat them next time, then that is what baseball professional evaluators call "progress." If you do better the next time, that is what they call "development."

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 05:36 PM) Ah yes the ever honest White Sox front office. What have they been dishonest about under Rick Hahn? Why would he say "we are looking forward to 2019"? What does he gain by lying there? People are entitled to their opinion, but I am quite sure you are the only person on this site who believes that the Sox are going to compete next year and should spend excessively on the free agent market. I think the Sox will probably be close to 30 games under .500 at the ASB next year, and they'll rebound to be only 10 or so games under .500 after the ASB. They are going to go through a stretch of 162 games where they will probably lose 120 of them.

QUOTE (Quin @ Jul 24, 2017 -> 12:22 PM) It also probably stands to reason that Nellie would have a few more Ks and a bit more pop with the evolution of the game. But still, he would have a 70+ hit tool, if not an 80. Would you take this with your pick: Hit: 75 Power: 30 Run: 50 Field: 60 Arm: 50 (I have no idea how to rank Nellie's arm, not having seen him play) I'm basically imagining Yolmer Sanchez (thanks DA for the comp) but with elite hitting. Ozzie Albies

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 02:45 PM) How can you judge a guy when the team is this bad? You go to the park and it really means nothing. Sure you might want good personal stats but I'd assume it affects your entire plate appearance. If team is down 7-0 in the fourth and the team is 15 games back of first, how can you care about working the count, etc. You just try to hit a homer. Now if the team is a contender and every bat counts, there'd be more concentration I'd think. This losing stuff can go both ways. You might get a high draft pick, but I would think (not saying I'm right) it would affect everybody on the current roster in a not so good way. I guess trying to earn a big time contract might be incentive enough, possibly. If Tim Anderson has 3 terrible years in a row, then I've seen enough of him, and I'm sure the organization will have as well.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 04:42 PM) The So have like 10 top 100 prospects, 3 of which are top 10 caliber, and a top 3 pick in 2018 all but sewn up. There is no way the Astros compiled that kind of talent after one draft. But hey, if you want to run with the Astros comparison...do you think it's worth punting an entire season of baseball to get ourselves a Mark Appel? It doesn't matter what I think, the White Sox are not going to be good next year.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 04:14 PM) There's a lot more to baseball than just adding/subtracting WAR numbers. This year's team has clearly quit, they are fine with being walked all over. WAR is not going to capture the aura of dread that surrounds the current squad. It's ok to have one season like this, but losing is a plague. I dont think it's a good idea to have an MVP talent like Moncada waste his service time on a team that won't be trying to contend this decade. I don't know what more you want me to tell you. They aren't going to make any big splashes, and having an uber talented player like Moncada develop at the MLB level is just as important. They are going to have two seasons like this where they lose close to 100 games. The Astros lost 324 games between 2011-2013, which is an average of 108 per season. That is one of the worst stretches a team has probably ever had in MLB history, but they started with literally almost nothing - they didn't have assets to trade from the MLB level and didn't have much in the minors. They lost 92 in 2014, and then won the division in 2015. To correlate this to the White Sox, figure the White Sox are in the 2nd year of the Astros losing phase. They are going to be bad again next year, and 2019 will show signs of life with them ready to take off in 2020.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 03:20 PM) When people say they will be worse next year I wonder if they understand what that means for the players everyone is counting on for the future. For them to actually get worse would require that Moncada, Gioltio and Lopez (not to mention midseason arrivals like Kopech and Jimenez and the tier below guys like Polo, Cordell, Delmonico etc) are basically all 0.0 WAR players. That's not good. That puts the rebuild in serious peril if nobody they call up is worth anything. Of players traded already: Quintana - 2 WAR Swarzak - 1.7 WAR Kahnle - 1.4 WAR Frazier - 1 WAR Robertson - 0.8 WAR That's about 7 WAR. The Sox are currently on pace to lose about 100 games. Those players you mentioned could just as easily combine for 7 WAR, which would be phenomenal for their development, and the Sox are still at square one record wise. That's not including guys like Melky and Gonzalez, who will also be gone next year. This team will be bad next year and that is OK. The key is that they are a much better team at game 162 than they are at game 1, which is exactly the opposite of this season, which was the intention all along.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 12:57 PM) I can imagine Anderson will be judged two different points of his career. a.) How he is doing as a member of one of the worst teams in baseball. b.) How he is doing as a contender. He has a free pass til the Sox are contenders. At that point, he'll be re-assessed again. Same with Rodon, all the first-round prospects we've acquired. They won't truly be judged til we are contenders and their performance means something. Moncada could hit .100 up until the point we are considered a legitimate team. At that point and only that point would he be judged. Anderson has a free pass right now. He should take advantage of it. I do stand by my comment that he should take off the rest of the season to properly get help for losing such a close friend. He could go play some lower level ball by his hometown to properly mourn. This is serious emotional stuff he's been through and if he needs help he should get it. Best wishes to TA. He absolutely does not have a free pass until the Sox are contenders. Assuming everything works out, they'll be contending in 2019 or 2020. Not everything works out that way all the time. It's certainly possible that prospects bust, the Sox don't have the pieces, and they aren't contenders until 2030. That would be awful, but it's certainly possible. Anderson will probably be a given chances into and maybe through 2019, but they'll be looking for replacements at that point if there's nothing from him.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 01:15 PM) A .500 season would be really encouraging. Much better than another trainwreck year. They won't be anywhere close to .500.

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 29, 2017 -> 01:29 PM) I have a feeling they are looking at making a free agent splash this offseason. KC is not going to let Hosmer walk, but that could open Moustakas up to be swiped. 4 years/$80m seems reasonable for both sides, if not a little bit of a bargain for the Sox. Free agency isn't what it used to be, though. dh Davidson/Delmonico/Gillaspie (or Abreu and one of these guys plays the field) c Narvaez/Smith (perhaps a FA) 1b Abreu 2b Moncada ss Anderson 3b Moustakas lf Delmonico/Cordell/Polo cf Engel/Leury (possible FA) rf Avi Gotta like that infield, especially if Anderson figures it out. Sox don't have much at 3b really, if Burger mashes his way to the majors the DH spot can be used to get him AB's. Considering what the pitching staff will look like, I think signing anyone to a significant contract would be a mistake. They will stick with 1 and 2 year deals and will flip those guys at the deadline.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 28, 2017 -> 08:31 PM) I don't know if that was really true. He might not have found a starting job, but I also don't think he was actively looking for back-up roles, etc, and there were mixed reports at how open he really was about looking for a job. I think the reality was Jay decided if he wasn't going to start for a contender, he was going to hang it up and enjoy his health and family (and we all know he wasn't going to start for a contender...maybe as a back-up after an injury, but not immediately). There were reports that he reached out to Houston and they wanted nothing to do with him.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but this thread outlines some potential lineups the Sox with which the Sox may open the year. If you don't think that team is going to lose 100 games based solely on the lineup, then you have another thing coming.