OmarComing25

Another reason I don't like a full rebuild is because I don't have faith in proper execution. A big problem has been the inability to develop hitters, but if we go full rebuild with the same crew, then that doesn't fix the root problem. We need a change at the top before it makes sense to commit to a full rebuild.

I still completely disagree that a full rebuild is necessary or the right move, especially with our rotation. We need to make a few savvy moves and have a couple young guys turn into usable pieces, and I see no reason we can't be a pretty good contender by 2017. Hell, if our team this year just repeated their 2014 seasons, we'd likely have a wildcard spot right now. The situation is not extremely dire by any means. Half the reasons for the Cubs success this year were guys picked up off the scrap heap. We hit on a couple similar-type moves and suddenly everything looks different. Yes we have a lot of holes on the position player side, but we have a lot of pitching talent in the organization, and if we continue to develop them into guys that can contribute at the ML level we can trade our surplus to fill those holes. We don't have a horribly aging team, no crippling contracts, and we've been drafting a lot better in the last few years both locally and internationally. We're not necessarily in an enviable position of course, but I don't see reason for such extreme pessimism, especially considering we lost 99 games just two years ago and in today's game you only need to win 86ish games to be a contender.

I'm not one of those AL fans that would go "Hurr Durr the Cardinals would be lucky to win 76 games with an AL schedule", but to just look at the records of the top teams in both leagues (while completely ignoring the bottom) and concluding that one league is better than the other solely based on that is a really lazy way to look at it.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:58 AM) Exactly. This is all a baseball fan needs to acknowledge. The pitching in the NL is absolutely horrendous. "But they have Kershaw & Greinke & Bumgarner & Arrieta". Shut up. Nobody can name more than a couple #2 starters in the NL, let alone the #3-5s. It's junk ball, plain and simple. Just acknowledge it. To be fair there's plenty of s*** pitching in the AL too, just look at the Tigers and Red Sox staffs.

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:28 AM) It's been discussed endlessly and tirelessly that the lack of a DH is a major disadvantage to NL teams in interleague play. Until there's a DH in the NL, they will continue to have a worse record. Even so, I'm not sure where you're getting that the NL is better though. There's no easy wins in the AL, I would take the A's over like 6-7 NL teams. The NL has many of the top records, sure, but they also have all the really s***ty teams. It begs the question of just whether the top is that good, or the bottom is that bad. Probably a bit of both, but I'm not convinced the top NL teams are any better than the top AL teams. However, the bottom of the NL is pretty awful.

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Aug 28, 2015 -> 08:18 AM) The NL is better than the AL overall, though. They have the hardest division in baseball. They'd be 30 over in the AL Central. I don't how you can say that. First of all, the AL is 140-120 in interleague play. Small sample size, but the Cubs have a losing record against the AL Central this season (I'm not saying they'd be under .500 in our division though). The AL is clearly better this year in my opinion, the worst six teams in the major leagues are all in the NL. All the top teams in the NL get to pad their win totals against them. I'm not convinced that the Pirates or Cardinals are better than the Blue Jays or Astros at this point, the schedules are too imbalanced and there's too much variation in baseball to simply say "better record = better team".

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Aug 27, 2015 -> 10:05 PM) Based on what? Some of the top teams are in the NL right now. Would you say that about the Cardinals or Pirates too? Under .500 is a big stretch but I think all three of those teams would have a worse record in the AL for sure. Way too many easy wins in the NL.

Damn Trayce hits the ball hard. He's earning all his hits.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Aug 27, 2015 -> 07:35 PM) Rodney is on fumes like Soriano earlier. Maybe, but it's a low risk move.

Nasty pitch

He struck out, but still an impressive AB.

Trayce smoked that foul ball.

8 straight balls. Yikes.

How much would Cespedes cost? I know it seems like we blew all our money last offseason, but it sounds like we were intending to sign Samardzija long-term, so the money we were planning to give to him can go elsewhere. I hate giving a lot of money to 30 year olds, but Heyward is young enough that I think he might be worth it.

The bottom 6 teams (by record) are all in the NL. I know 3 of the top 4 records are also in the NL, but this begs the question as to whether the top is playing particularly well or if the bottom is just really bad. Probably a bit of both. AL does have a .542 winning percentage in interleague play this year, and only 4 NL teams even have winning interleague records.

James Russell has had a really rough last 10 days. 4 2/3 IP, 10 ER

Walsh played from 1904-1917, it's really difficult to compare two pitchers across two completely different eras. That being said, I'd give the edge to Sale because Walsh played against only white players. The talent pool today (which includes players from all over the world, not just black players) is just so much bigger.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Aug 27, 2015 -> 09:28 AM) I think what is bugging me moreso now is that in Chicago the White Sox are either ignored or on the shows like B&B they are compared to the cubs. Who cares? Even in the years we have a much better team the Cubs still get more attention on sports radio. Check out the top prospect lists. We still have a mediocre farm system overall, the Cubs aren't as good as last year because of all the talent that has graduated but they still have a pretty good farm system. What was Sale throwing a few years ago? Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention but was he always throwing 97-98? Arrieta has already set a career high in IP, that may affect him down the stretch but who really knows. I don't think the increased velocity will be much of a problem though. They'll just sign another top-flight SP in the offseason, and Haren won't pitch in the postseason this year anyway.

Can we stop with the nonsense that the Cubs winning a title/being good for a few seasons is going to be a death knell for this franchise? Most Sox fans hate the Cubs as it is, they're not going to jump ship if that happens, and the vast majority of the casual fans are already Cub fans, it's not going to do much. Did the Mets disappear after the Yankees won all those titles in the 90s (including one against the Mets)? No? Then we'll be fine. Part of me wants the Cubs to win a title so that the doomsayers can be proven wrong. And perhaps that would force some accountability for the front office of a franchise that's become too complacent post 2005.

Even if Thompson sucks against righties, the fact that he can hit lefties means he can still provide a lot of value to this team, considering that pretty much everyone else besides Soto is awful against LHP. I already like Thompson as the 4th OF going forward, and he should definitely be in the starting lineup versus lefties. If he can hit LHP at a decent clip and provide good defense, that's a very, very valuable guy off the bench.

I hate the Cubs as much as anyone here but f*** it this run they're on is incredible right now. If they continued going crazy through the end of the season and ended up winning 100+ games this season I wouldn't even be mad, that'd be too impressive.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 25, 2015 -> 11:55 AM) I see no scenario that has us signing that type of free agent. Even if we don't sign a top guy, what if we end up trading Quintana and decide to replace him with one of the 2nd tier SP on the market this offseason? Top 10 pick is still really valuable there.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2015 -> 11:53 AM) If we're talking about the difference between spots 11 and 13 you're right. If you're talking about the difference between slot 11 and slot 10, you're 100% wrong. That's the difference between being able to sign a top level free agent and not. Or the difference between a high first round pick and a 2nd round pick. That's the difference between having a Chris Sale/Carson Fulmer and giving him up. Exactly. 11th means we lose protection of the top 10 picks in case we want to make a run at Heyward or another top free agent. It also means the Sox didn't play well enough to warrant much enthusiasm for next year. If we ended up with a decent finish to season and win 81-82 games, I'd be fine with that if it meant our young guys were succeeding and we can count on them for next year (although I'm not sure how much they can show us in 5 weeks).

QUOTE (flavum @ Aug 25, 2015 -> 09:45 AM) Hanging on to 11. They'll never get better than 7th. What's probably going to happen...they'll win 19-21 games, end up with 77-79 wins and draft 11th or 12th. Drafting 11th is pretty much worst case scenario for this season (well that and Samardzija not getting signed by someone else so we lose the pick).

QUOTE (LDF @ Aug 25, 2015 -> 09:37 AM) biggest bro???? pls explain. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bro Basically someone with a personality similar to the stereotypical frat guy.