SonofaRoache

Something seems odd about this. Their website and clientele don't match what I'd expect from him.

What makes a great player great, is that the odds of them performing poorly over an extended stretch is much lesser than an average player. What makes great teams great, is that they have so many good players, that even if some struggle, others can pick up the slack. On an average or bad team, if the few good players struggle, there is no shot. Each player would have to play great with little room for error. For instance, if Yoan and Eloy were neutralized, how would we score? If Gio has a Cubs moment, who picks it up for him?

Actually you almost can. Fans forget regular season baseball ain't the playoffs. The difference is matchups and focusing real hard on your opponent. If we played Houston and the Nats... Cole vs Gio Verlander vs Nova Greinke vs Lopez Sherzer vs Gio Strasburg vs Nova Corbin vs Lopez Pitching matchups would wreck us, and this is before you get to the lineups and bullpen.

You aren't rewarding them. They will typically get beat in round 1 or the play in game. When you play 162 games, if you win 90 you should have a shot to play in the post season. You shouldn't have a feeling of doing all of that work for nothing. I wouldn't consider teams that win 90 to be mediocre. I believe 78 to 85 wins is mediocre.

We as Sox fans should embrace this idea. It increases our odds drastically. We should also hope for the removal of the service time manipulation as we got all of ours out of the way in time. We don't want KC, Cleveland, and Detroit benefiting.

The NBA system is fine, people just dont understand its purpose. Only half the teams make it, and they play 7 game series now. The top 3 teams in each conference are essentially rewarded with lesser opponents to tune up for difficult series that follow. It's like in college basketball how the top 3 seeds get tune ups. Baseball playoffs are rough because the top two teams typically play opponents just as good as they are in the first round. Since only 4 teams make the playoffs, you are only allowing the elites to play. The same is true for the NFL to a lesser degree. This is why you really don't know who is gonna win it all.

Facts. If you play 162 games it's only fair that teams winning 90 games get a crack at a title. Especially when most good baseball teams win between 89 and 95 games, over 162 games that difference is not too significant. I don't like the idea of picking your team because it compromises the integrity of fairness. If you are the Yankees, you'd probably pick the Twins first, meaning teams like the Red Sox, A's, Ray's, etc can coast knowing even if they finish last, the won't play the top seed. Teams might also get unfairly picked based on injuries, this is not a good look for baseball.

I could win a billion dollars tomorrow. In hockey and the NFL lower seeds have just as good of a chance to upset the top seeds as MLB teams. The reason MLB is a toss up is because seeds 1 through 4 are usually all very good teams/division winners. In the post season, the 2019 White Sox would have no chance against a Houston team that is game planning for them. Hell, arguably the best 3 starting pitchers played for Houston. The hitting, bullpen, and coaching also heavily favored Houston.

You said that the 2019 Sox could beat the 2019 Astros in a seven game series. That is not the same as beating a team 4 out of 7 during the regular season. Teams prepare much differently for a post season series.

The part where the 2019 White Sox could beat the 2019 Astros in a 7 game series. We wouldn't win any matchups against them. Lineup, rotation, bullpen, manager, cheating, etc. The Twins beat us by 28 games, the Yankees swept them, and then lost to Houston.

Excuse me?

More playoff teams is fine, but picking your opponent is dumb. Top seed plays lowest seed and this continues on down. Having a bye for 3 games is also dumb for baseball, as that much rest may hurt the top seeds. They can just do a few play in games in each league and then the series start after that.

I think we are all in on Mazara. They went to far with the love, just terrible timing for us. Joc should be a Sock. (I know it's Sox)

I'm interested to know if they bring Kopech up after they get the year back and then let him pitch til our season is over. It sounds like they will do just that. Magical isn't the type of bat right now that needs to be up, extra year be damned.

No extension no shot. This talk is to not be obvious about manipulation.

Good news that the Twins didn't get a quality number 3 starter. I doubt Gatorade will be tradeable now after all of this.

The premise here is IF Mazara becomes worthy of an extension. I don't like him that much, but that was the debate. If he in fact becomes that good, then yes it would be better for us than having Walker for 6 years. Especially if we extend him.

I'm not making any argument. I'm just saying we shouldn't be upset we traded for Mazara IF he turns out to be real good. Those two years would be more valuable than 6 from Walker. It would also mean for 2 years we have a top 5 lineup in the AL.

Steele Walker isn't good at this point. 2 years and possible extension of good player who was an elite prospect is better than 6 cheap years of a long shot.

If Mazara turns out to be a player worth extending, why are we complaining? That means we could probably make a serious run this year and/or next year.

If the reports are true and Boston thought Gatorade was a starter, but medicals show he is a reliever, why would they still trade with Minny? Unless the twins are willing to really pony up why would you settle for a relief picture after trading away Betts?

The Sox could trade Cease and filler and then send Magical away for pitching.

I call bullshit, but after the Mookie deal, I won't write this off completely.

Because we would have had to trade our top prospects for Betts and wouldn't have re-signed him most likely.

Their biggest problem is they can't convince stars to come here. In the NBA if you have a star, or two, you can elevate your team to contender status instantly. The best they could do was 2 points per game Ben Wallace, Boozer and a washed up Pau Gasol.