FT35

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 25, 2017 -> 06:17 AM) Sal Perez and Molina are the only other catchers who are even close to being considered. Mauer is the interesting case with his split career...but he's probably not going to make it either. If his career ended in 2010 like Puckett, he gets in but not anymore since he became an average 1B/DH. Yeah Molina was on the inside track for sure before his injuries started. Mauer was a great catcher, but I think his almost complete lack of power may cost him. Yes, it's possible to see the slap hitters get in but usually you see a very high number of SB offset that lack of power. 6-time all-star certainly helps his case as being the best at his position though. We might have a case for him being in the conversation!

QUOTE (greg775 @ May 24, 2017 -> 07:34 PM) If Renteria is a bunt guy, get rid of him as soon as the team gets good again. Bunting is proven hazardous to a team's chances of scoring. I'm not a fan of the bunt either, but this might have to do with the fact that not a lot of guys can execute the bunt correctly--a fundamental issue.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ May 24, 2017 -> 12:57 PM) I think Kershaw is the only active starting pitcher who makes the Hall. Sabathia is borderline but I think he just misses it. Sale would need to be elite into his mid 30s and I don't see it happening. Felix was on track but he's been very mediocre his last few seasons and unless he returns to his previous form (unlikely) I don't see that happening either. If Bumgarner can nab a Cy Young or two I guess he has a shot, but no one else is in the conversation. At least until standards change to reflect the modern era. I think you're spot on with these names and their chances as of now. Maybe Max Scherzer and Verlander could be in this convo. I know I just posted a long line of thought on how to keep the significance of the win in the realm of what matters in assessing pitchers' HOF chances. But I'm not sure we should change the standard of what makes the HOF. You could pretty much make the same argument for catchers now. You have Posey, then up and comers like Sanchez, but aside from them, you really don't have a ton of catchers in the HOF conversation at this time. Should we change the standard so that more should qualify? Or should we just accept the fact that this era is light on HOF-caliber pitchers and catchers? Aside from the starters you mentioned, you are left with guys like Lester, Darvish, Cueto, Grienke, Hamels--all great pitchers...but are they Hall-of Famers!? How many guys like this would be in NOW if we changed the standard to include guys like this!?

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ May 24, 2017 -> 12:36 PM) If you believe in wins as a metric then you also have to believe that Jose Quintana is a mediocre pitcher, right? Wins as they are defined now, maybe. Mediocre, no, but Hall-of Fame? ehhh...I don't know...still early, but I would say no now even if he continues down this same path for the rest of his career.

Wins is the hang up because it's the only thing that matters but it doesn't matter. Lol. I don't think you can completely ignore it. When you look at a single win, it does not tell you the full story. But collectively, if you have a guy with more wins than anyone else over the course of his career, it does tell you something. You don't get lucky or benefit from a good team on your way to 200 wins. There are many times when the pitcher's performance is what directly led to the win. And nowadays, a ton of wins tells you that you are doing a whole lot right. The HOF-caliber pitchers tend to all have a lot of wins. It's not because they got lucky, but it's because they put their team in a position to win more times than not. To diminish the importance of the win, maybe a stat worth looking into could account for the % of a team's wins that a pitcher gets. Or a stat that compares their wins to the team's overall record for their career. Put the weight on stats like quality starts, maybe develop a new stat called "dominating starts" or something along those lines (7+ innings, 0-1 ER, 1.00 WHIP, 7+Ks). Weigh those stats 70-30 to a pitcher's actual wins. I still think you would find that most HOF-caliber pitchers would be strong in both. The exception would be guys like Quintana, who pitch well for bad teams--who could possibly get into the Hall on different metrics--but do you consider pitchers of Quintana's caliber Hall-of Famers? This is where you can get into trouble, but maybe the W stat needs an overhaul of criteria. One possible fix would be to use simple of logic. If a starting pitcher qualifies for a win and is "in-line" for the win when he departs, he gets credit for the win if his team ends up winning the game--regardless of whether the bullpen first blows the game. If a starter does not qualify for the win by failing to pitch the minimum innings in his outing, or leaves with his team tied or behind, he receives a "no decision," then the win will go to the reliever who was pitching when his team scored the winning run. Or keep the "Win" stat limited to starters--or any reliever who pitches the equivalent of 5 innings (the same a starter needs to qualify for a win)--otherwise a "team win" is earned. What if a game goes 18 innings and multiple pitchers pitch a qualifying 5 innings for the win you ask?! Nothing...because you cap a regular season MLB game to 12 innings and give the teams a tie to save the bullpens. You would RARELY have that problem and if you did, the win would go to the starting pitcher if he lift in-line for the win, the pitcher pitching at the time the winning run was scored--or a team win would be assessed. Examples: Quintana goes 8 innings of 1 run ball, leaves with a 3-1 lead. Robertson blows the save, Sox end up winning in the bottom of the 9th. Quintana gets the win. Quintana goes 4 innings, leaves with a lead, Chris Beck comes in and goes 5 innings--Beck gets the win because he qualified with 5 innings. Quintana goes 4 innings, leaves with a lead, Jennings pitches the 5th--Sox score winning run, Ynoa pitches the 6th, Jones pitches the 8th, Robertson the 9th--Jennings gets the win. Quintana goes 6 innings, leaves with Sox down 4-2, Jones goes 2 innings, Sox score winning run in 7th, Robertson pitches 9th--Jones gets the win because winning run was scored--Quintana was not "in-line" for the win when he departed. Quintana goes 5 innings leaves with the lead, Nate Jones pitches an inning and blows the lead, Chris Beck pitches 5 innings, Sox win it in the 11th--Quintana gets the win because he qualified and left "in-line" for the win--even though Beck pitched the qualifying number of innings (VERY unlikely scenario).

QUOTE (Wanne @ May 24, 2017 -> 12:16 AM) uhhh....yeah...this bunting crap is getting to be junior high level crap now. I get fundamentals and all...but c'mon man.... The other thing about Renteria is this...he is huge on defensive shifts. What's the best way to beat the defensive shift? Well a well-placed bunt on the 3rd base side of the field is tough to defend when your third baseman is standing on 2nd base. SO...from his perspective, when he sees teams in shifts on OUR hitters, his mind might be more apt to put the bunt on, because that's the play he's fearing when he puts his defensive shifts on.

I wasn't a fan of the hire at first, but I really missed the boat on him and am pleased to admit it. The fact that he has managed before really shows after watching Robin's teams the last few years. His decisions are more calculated. It just seemed like everything with Robin was a "gut" feeling decision making process. And OK...I get it...he played a crap ton of baseball, his gut feeling means more than most. But Renteria knows the managerial gambles that work more times than not and makes his decisions accordingly. You don't stick with a SP who has given up 4 runs in the 8th inning to "see if he can battle his way through it." Gut feeling or not, that's NOT a savvy decision, it's stupid. You don't take out Chris Sale for the 9th inning of a close game because he's at 100 pitches (and still unhittable). You don't roll out Ronald Belasario as your closer night after night and watch him blow games by the HANDFUL. I feel like Robin would roll the dice on his gut feelings with decisions that should have been calculated and then play the decisions that require your "gut" by the book--with not much to back them up from a data standpoint. Renteria--whether the gambles pay off or not--rolls the dice on the right things and goes with his gut on the right things. He has a better base of managerial understanding behind the decisions he makes. Many times it's a guessing game...but you don't have to decide blindly. Play your percentages and draw from experience--that's all you have as a manager and Rick certainly has that and uses those tools with better timing--regardless of the outcome. Obviously, I've not been in the clubhouse--ever...I'm speaking completely out of hunch here, but it seems like the guys are enjoying the game a little more and learning some things that are making them better players. I think he's the right man for this rebuild and could possibly build a connection with these guys that could transition to him being here when they get good. Guys and gals...has anyone else had the feeling that the Sox are doing a lot of things right now? Outside of trading Quintana, Frazier and Robertson for Torres, Judge, Meadows, Robles, and Bellinger (THESE BOARDS! HAHA) it seems like a lot of moves the fans want to see, the team is making a reality. I can't believe the pace of this rebuild...we will feel it more when we start going through 5-15 20 game stretches, but at least we have front office news that keeps our heads nodding, "yes."

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 23, 2017 -> 08:42 AM) It would depend which teams could bid, and if there was a matching penalty. If some of the big boys were able to bid, I don't think Robert is a White Sox. Just like with Abreu, the teams that bid high, had first base pretty much covered so they were out. Boston was actually thinking about putting Abreu at 3B if they had signed him. Yikes.

Lost in the shuffle are the thousands of talented kids from our own country! I think we will be OK if we end up with a couple of filler Americans on our team. Who cares if we used all our resources on this 1 quality signing--once in a while the quality over quantity model is a nice change of pace. We're already home so we might as well go big. I LOVE the gamble on this kid.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 19, 2017 -> 12:45 PM) In 2013 they won 92 games and made the WC. Lebron was in Miami. The Indians drew more than 100,000 less than the White Sox lowest total this century, and every couple of months we read on this site how the White Sox have to move. It is the risk of getting very bad. The fans find something else to do, and they don't come back. Yeah you're right...that 2013 Cavs team was NOT good either. It's too bad they lost that connection with the team--you'd have a hard time keeping me away if I lived in Cleveland...Lindor is exciting and that pitching...... You know what they need is Major League 4 to come out...Charlie Sheen could still lead a team to the series with that heat...I'm sure of it.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 19, 2017 -> 11:07 AM) This is a team that had some 500 + game sellout streak, then they sucked and even though they have had several good teams since, never recovered attendance-wise. It IS very odd. Although like someone else said...it's tough to compete with a LeBron-led NBA playoff championship-caliber product this time of year. The years before LeBron came back were tough teams to sell tickets for, but the recent years the Indians started to get good again--LeBron was somewhat of a factor. Be interesting to see their attendance numbers after the all-star break when LeBron is rocking his tribe hat in a luxury suite and the the MLB post-season push comes back.

Robertson for Eaton!?!?

QUOTE (SoxFan2003 @ May 16, 2017 -> 03:08 PM) Took a group of about 10 people from work to the game last Friday for the groupon patio party deal. As the only real Sox fan in the group, I was the organizer. Some had never been to a Sox game before, and none of them had done the pre-game patio party before. We are already discussing going again later this summer. You'd be shocked at how many couldn't believe that going to a MLB baseball game anywhere other than Wrigley could actually be fun. Just doing my part to help the Sox raise attendance. I think a lot of it has to do with the removal of the expectation of winning. The focus for the team is on developing a good culture, playing hard, developing into the best player you can be, learning from your mistakes and having fun doing so. That "vibe" has made its way to the crowd. I noticed a big difference in the atmosphere last Friday too. The last few times I've been to games, the fans (along with the players) have almost been tense--pressing. The focus was on the mistakes the team was making because they were sold as a team who was all in and going for it. Now the environment is more positive and more forgiving as fans encourage the team to play better--we're maybe even a little surprised when they win--it's an added bonus instead of a temporary exhale before getting back to the frustration mindset. We know there is money coming off the books at the end of the year, we know there's a historically large FA class coming up, we know there's big promise in the system, we know we have a few guys performing now who we NEVER thought would be in the mix, we know the weather is getting nice and tickets are cheap--when all that comes together, you get a sense of satisfaction. I thought the rebuild would be brutal, but it's actually a great time to be a Sox fan and consume baseball at the park. And for new fans, it's a great time to get in on the ground level of what could be an exciting time in the franchise's history.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ May 17, 2017 -> 12:11 PM) He's not really THAT young. He'll be 28 in July. I think he should have options though, because I don't think he was added to the 40 man until 2014 or 2015, so he should have at least 1 left. I hope so. Always like to see our guys find success whether it's figuring things out with us or somewhere else--as long as it's not against us! Right now, I think here with the Sox is the perfect place for him to work things out and define the player he is. Maybe he's trying on different hats on what type of player he can be, but he has a clear path to MLB playing time and can get the long look from our management (and other teams) here that many others don't have.

Another important thought to keep in mind is that the whole reason Yolmer is rostered is to hold things down at 2B until Moncada is ready. The fact that he is enjoying the success that he is is a bonus. Yolmer kept the Sox from going out and finding a Jimmy Rollins-type vet to fill that spot. That in itself is a big plus. Now we're learning that he has value that we can either re-purpose or move to someone else for a piece. Another big plus. Kudos to him for the strides he's made. Let's keep it going!

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ May 17, 2017 -> 11:59 AM) Nice post. Not that I expect the Sox to use it, but does Tyler have any options left? I think so. He's young enough. I'm not an expert...just the dreaded superfan... But if he doesn't find success with us, I can see him catching on with a small-ball team like Oakland or KC who has a high-octane defense/low budget offensive approach to roster composition.

This is a solid investigation of stats and reasoning! I like Tyler, but I never saw what many others did when they were calling for him to start. I see him more of a journeyman bench player--a Tony Graffanino player comp. Gloves have a way of finding roster spots in MLB. I think he's better than what he is now--but I couldn't tell you exactly what he is right now. It looks like someone watched him hit a few bombs in batting practice and told him that he had what it takes to be a power hitter in this league and to swing as hard as he can ALL the time. I don't remember this being where he found his success in the past.

Certainly don't mean any disrespect to the op, ron883. All fun. Sometimes we do miss the forest through the trees. I'm glad Yolmer is playing well enough to prompt this thought in someone's mind. That's a GOOD thing!

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 17, 2017 -> 07:19 AM) LOL! But where would he play?!?!? Tough call...maaaaaaayyyyybe on another team??? Depends on what he does tonight in LA!

QUOTE (ron883 @ May 16, 2017 -> 09:52 PM) Yolmer has shown to be an above average fielder and his bat has been awesome this year. How does this impact what we do with moncada? If yolmer keeps it up, how can they move him? The Henry Cotto-Ken Griffey Jr Predicament Henry has shown to be an above average fielder and his bat has been awesome this year. How does this impact what we do with Ken Griffey Jr? If Henry keeps it up, how can they move him? Maybe this will help shed some light on this situation?! : )

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ May 15, 2017 -> 11:23 PM) Primarily Sox fans attend to see the team play competitive baseball around .500 and to never quit when they are behind. Another reason - overzealous cub fans have also spiked interest in the White Sox. Sox fans have really grown sick of the cubs and their fans. I see a lot more people this year wearing White Sox hats and jerseys around town. Being a Sox fan seems more special than it has for a long time. I'm not from Chicago so I can't attest on who is wearing what, but I think you make an excellent point. Remember the whole Yankees/Red Sox saga when the Red Sox were pushing to break their curse and get past the Yanks in the post season? That team with Ortiz, Damon, Schilling etc...EVERYONE not from New York picked a side in that battle and almost everyone picked Boston. I remember watching those games and rooting hard for Boston to beat NY. I'm a die-hard Sox fan--I can't explain why other than people just have a weird tendency to root for the underdog. Once Boston won their Championships and established themselves as a top franchise in the league, I went back to rooting against them! I do know that in cities around Chicago, everyone came out of the woodwork and put on Cubs gear last fall because it was "cool" to be a Cubs fan. Yes...that's the only reason they represented--couldn't tell you a name on the roster outside Kris Bryant! Now that they won, people feel less of the need to pull for them. It will be "cooler" to root for whatever team hasn't won in a while and only in the event of it being a "new" team (Cleveland? Astros? Rockies?) will they actually consider buying a shirt. I do think that having a new manager has helped us a lot--not because he's won so many games, but because the team has a sense of being grounded again in their fundamentals and their approach to the game. I don't feel like we're winging it on a nightly basis when it comes to playing baseball. That fact alone has been good for our brand. Possibly even 8% good!

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ May 11, 2017 -> 01:28 PM) Petco is amazing. I haven't been for a Sox game, but the stadium is fantastic. And San Diego is wonderful. I've heard! Would love to hit a game there. Plus, I'm from Fort Wayne, IN and our little single A team is a Padres affiliate. We've seen some great prospects here--including Rymer Liriano, who while watching him in 2011--you would have sworn he was the next big name to come on to the scene. I can def see why the Sox took a flier on him...sucks that he's turning out to be Lastings Millege part 2 so far.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 11, 2017 -> 01:14 PM) You'll have a blast. You are juuuust missing a warm up though. Ha! I tried to tell my girlfriend that when she bought tickets for my birthday! Oh well...there will be so much winning going on we won't realize our hands are numb. Nothing a coat won't fix...it's always baseball weather! Looks like next week will be NICE...just means we'll have to come back again!

QUOTE (steveno89 @ May 11, 2017 -> 12:57 PM) Don't get sucked into the storybook 2005 Sox narrative The White Sox have been trying to catch lightning in a bottle for far too long and really need to undergo an extensive rebuilding to have a better future. 2005 saw the White Sox remain healthy, and ride a very strong rotation and bullpen to a championship As currently constructed the Sox do not have enough talent to be a realistic contender. Guys like Cabrera and Frazier are gone after this season and the team needs to be thinking towards the future. I know, I know...it's just so near and dear to my heart...plus...I gotta get psyched for the Sox/Pads game tomorrow. Traveling in to town for it. I only make a game every few years or so. Looking forward to being fans with all of you who go on a regular basis.

I know this is not the popular perspective on this board, however I just don't think it would be a horrible idea to just call the guy up to see how he fits in with this team. I get the business side of things--the year of control--all that. But 1 thing keeps looming in my mind--the past. The 2005 year actually. The 2004-05 off season was supposed to have gutted the Sox. We just shed the likes of Carlos Lee and Magglio Ordonez and we were supposed to be horrible. Their replacement--Scotty Pods and some bullpen help. That team showed they had a different plan for the season--they clicked with the manager's "Ozzieball" philosophy and rode it all the way to the title. They did it with guys like Jon Garland & Jose Contreras in their rotation--both who had ERA's near 5 the year before. They had just lost the heart of their order and even Big Frank was battling injuries--many people pegged them to be buried in the AL Central. But they started out hot and just clicked as an ego-free team embracing a managerial approach--and really took off with the Bobby Jenks call-up. Here we sit with a team of young, unproven players--vets who have been acquired with the sole purpose of being flipped--and just months off of trading away their "best" players. We have a new manager--we're off to a decent start, we don't have a ton of egos and we are seeing the flipper vets perform well--this time Holland and Gonzalez rather than Contreras and Garland. I am all about the rebuild and making the right decisions, but would 2005 have turned out the same if they had not called up Jenks? Or if they had flipped Contreras and Garland? Or if they had jumped at a chance to trade Buehrle (Q?) for a boat load of prospects? I'm just hoping they aren't so focused on the future that they overlook what they may have in front of them. Not saying this is the SAME situation--but those 2005 guys went from Yolmers to Legends just by the way they played the game together. Did any of you peg Geoff Blum as a World Series Hero? I might be inclined to see if Moncada is the missing piece to THIS team. If he's an instant stud like many prospects of his caliber have become--all of a sudden, you've got a competitive lineup and a rotation who is thriving to go with a lights out bullpen--with a schedule full of winnable division games. Yes...it's a narrative we have heard SO much--stuck in the middle each year--mediocre. But this year seems a little different with an actual manager calling the shots, money to spend and some potential difference makers cooking down in AAA. They also have shown the rare ability to get clutch hits and win close games. How would a couple call-ups, a catcher, and maybe a CF upgrade change the look of this team?