Nardiwashere

I have YouTubeTV and they removed MLB network from their channel lineup a year or so ago. ESPN stopped doing daily Baseball Tonight a while back. I'm looking for a highlight show to watch as I go to bed. Anyone know of an option on another channel/streaming service/youtube? I know MLB does like youtube recaps but from what I see, its just random clips thrown together with no context or anything. Without any host or graphics, its just plays strung together and I can't follow what's happening. I can't believe out of ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News, ESPN+, FSN, Stadium, FanDuelTV, CBS/Paramount, Warners/Turner, NBC Universal etc. there isn't one traditional highlight show available for MLB. ESPN and Fox is all NFL offseason talk and idiots sitting around tables yelling at each other about nonsense. Has baseball become that niche?

I was just going off mlb pipeline's ETA. You're probably right on those two... but still... there's an influx of guys coming and a lot of money available. This doesn't have to be some prolonged rebuild.

This year they will be bad. I think 70 games give or take a few... so like 67-73ish? The goal should be to find a handful of guys who are in their long term plans. 2025 should be the fun "hey, this team isn't bad!" year. 2026 they should be competing. In 2024-2025, the following players should be making debuts Montgomery, Thorpe, Ramos, Quero, Zavala, Nastrini, Iriarte, Eder, Cannon, Fletcher, Leasure, Berroa, Bush. They also have a ton of money coming off the books. There's no reason you need to be bad for 5 years in order to be good again. Full rebuilds can work (Cubs, Astros) but that's not the only way to build a team.

I can't believe they'd trade for a guy who couldn't hit 90mph. Let's say he is low 90s like everyone says. Is it possible for guys his age/experience to just gain a couple mph or is he what he is at this point?

Bauer was always a dbag. In addition to the allegations, he just seems like the absolute worst person to deal with on a daily basis. I want no part of him. Even if he is innocent of all charges (I'm not saying he is), he is such an egotistical loudmouth.... he'd be blabbering about it all season, flying his drones into scoreboards, and boasting about cheating etc. Clevinger is not someone I would want dating my sister and I personally would not want to hang out with him... but his situation seems different than Bauer. I always saw Giolito and Cease hanging out with him and talking. Those two guys don't seem like the type to be friendly with a child abuser or wife beater. Maybe they were just being cordial because he was a co-worker but from the outside, it didn't look like he was some outcast. They have spent too much time talking about changing the culture and vibes... He isn't good enough and the team isn't close enough to winning to waste money on signing him if he's as bad of a dude as the public thinks. Besides, unlike Hahn, Getz strikes me as a guy who would care more about character. I imagine the team knows more about that whole story than the public. Would I sign him? Probably not... but if they did, they are doing it after having him in the clubhouse for a season and knowing more about him.

Lolololol... so on March 14 of his first season here, you have written off Bannister because he gave some generic "I believe in Kopech. I can't wait to try to get his game back to the next level!" quote when he was hired?

This is absurd. Kopech has been here 7 years. He sucks. Also- show me the quote where they said "We guarantee he will be fixed and turn into a good starting pitcher"

I don't find this surprising at all. I figured he was going to be in the bullpen all offseason.... it was at least a 50/50 thing.

I like this. The goal of this season should be to find a few players that will be on the next good team. If we go into next year with 2-3 SPs and 4-5 spots in the lineup figured out plus a handful of bullpen arms we like, that's good news, right?

That's not the same. Bannister doesn't have the same job as Getz had. If they bring him up and he's good, no one will say "Boy, that Paul Janish really knows how to develop players"

Who cares if Fulmer was on the top 100 list in the same calendar year that Getz got hired? Getz has nothing to do with him. The rest of those guys on your list were in the minors partially for service time manipulation. Like others said, they were all "developed" by other organizations. If they bring up Thorpe in September and he's awesome, is that attributable to Paul Janish?

There's some truth to this but Kopech, Eloy, Moncada, Lopez weren't guys who spent time in the minors and were "developed." I assume you meant Fullmer instead of Fuller. He was in majors in 2016. Guys like Rutherford, Collins etc. also could have just sucked. Also, who knows what authority he had... I don't blame Chris Getz because Ryan Cordell was bad. Maybe I'm wrong.

I wish they would have brought in someone else (or at least interviewed outside candidates)... but I'm willing to give him a shot. I'm not sure how much I blame Getz for the prior front office's failures. I definitely am giving him a shorter leash than someone who has no ties to the previous front office... but I'll give him at least a year or two. I've liked a lot of what he's done this offseason and I like the idea of Bannister doing what he's doing.

I don't mind this trade at all. We didn't get a super high end guy but it seems fair. Everyone was saying 2 top 100 guys plus a lotto ticket seemed reasonable. They ended up with one guy who is a definite top 100 guy and two borderline top 100 guys plus a reliever they can flip in a few months. To me, that feels equivalent. Kind of like a hybrid between a quality and quantity trade. It sounds like its entirely possible that all 3 guys end up being top 100 in near future... and that isn't even counting what you get from Wilson. If they got Kjersted, Ortiz, and a lotto ticket in December everyone would have been content (including myself). From all accounts that deal was never possible. I kind of prefer what they ultimately got... at the very least, its a wash. That deal had the risk of being being two 26 year old who end up as a 1b and a utility player. Even though we don't have anyone coming back as highly rated as Kjersted, I think this deal is more interesting. I cant remember a time that the team had so many viable SP options. Usually they have a few high ceiling prospects and 4 other dudes. There's like 15-18 guys I can see being in the rotation in the next 2 years (although not a ton of ace potential guys). Would I have preferred a highly touted can't miss LH slugger who is a lock to stick in the corner OF? Yeah. But I can't understand anyone saying they will be bad for 4-5 years in this thread and on twitter. A large segment of the fanbase is just pouting because the Hahn rebuild failed. Its over. That pisses me off too... But move on. They have a lot of money off the books (or coming off the books) and the bones are there for the next good team in about a year and a half.

So you're saying they originally planned to get ISFA money to help build at the racetrack but since a significant portion of the board is appointed by the Mayor of Chicago, they would not get those funds unless they stayed within the city limits? Were they unaware of this when they purchased the Arlington site? Still.... if you're only moving next door and not getting new revenue streams, why bother building a new stadium at all? Seems like a waste of time and resources.

Here is what I don't understand about the Bears- The reason they would want to move to Arlington Heights is because they would own their own stadium and surrounding land and be able to profit off of the new development surrounding the park (hotels, bars, etc.). Let's say they do build a stadium next door on the existing parking lot.... they remain merely a tenant and there can't be any new commercial development on the lakefront site. What's the upside? Spending a billion dollars for a domed stadium with a little more seating capacity that you use a dozen times a year (at most)? If the new stadium hosts a Super Bowl or has more events, why would the Bears care? They aren't making anything off of that, right? The current soldier field is only 20 years old and seems fine to me every time I go. That isn't even taking the fans' complaints about difficulty of getting to the stadium into account... those issues would still exist.

I'm willing to give Getz and the new front office the benefit of the doubt on these deals for a little bit. I assume they are clearing out guys they don't love or targeting guys they like. Its not like they are trading Montgomery for a bullpen arm. To me, it seems like its a swap of similar guys. We obviously like Horn better and the Cubs needed space on their roster.

Planning to build a stadium and the construction takes years. Are they only allowed to begin the process when they are over .500? What if they started this process back when they made the playoffs? When they got bad, should they have scrapped the whole thing? For all we know, the team will be awesome when this park is completed. They have an expiring lease. Its ridiculous to say they can't figure out where they will be playing because the team has been disappointing the last couple of years.

You could have a couple 100 seater boats make trips before and after the games and move a decent number of people, no? If they were Sox branded boats, that would be really cool haha.

Prices are already silly and people still go. In recent years, I've been to games in Philly and Miami. The prices in Philly were no different than Sox and Miami was actually shockingly cheap. When I went to Citi Field, it was a little pricier but that's probably mostly because its in NYC. Its funny... I never hear these people worry about keeping payroll down so blue collar fans aren't alienated when prices increase due to increased expenses.

The new one I'm seeing is that moving parks will drive away the blue collar fans. No idea why this would happen.

Yup.. the increase in time to get to the new site isn't significant. I live near the new site and if I jump on an el or take an uber, I can get there door to door in 10 minutes or less most of the time. Here's another thing. I imagine a ton of Sox fans live along the orange line route. I had a paralegal who worked for me and she would go to like 10-15 games a year with her family and friends and roll like 25 deep each time. People like that are going to be able to easily jump on the train instead of being forced to drive. The only thing this park wont have is the tailgating, which essentially became popular because there was nothing else to do near the current park. If you gave Cub fans the choice of wrigleyville or tailgating, do you think they'd prefer tailgating? Last time I went to get drinks after a game I was just standing on the sidewalk outside of Turtles/Cork and it was pathetic. We ended up just taking an uber to Weathermark Tavern, which is kind of near the new site.

Sox fans are a weird bunch. Practically my whole life, people bitched about the current stadium. Now, they are planning to build a ballpark that looks like it would be one of the premier sports venues in the entire country and a large segment of Sox fans suddenly fell in love with the current park. Today on the radio, Laurence Holmes was making a huge deal that it only takes him 8 minutes to get to the Sox game now. The new park will take him 18 minutes he said. This was supposed to be damning evidence against having a beautiful new stadium. The new site is near all the major highways. It will have access to a metra, red, green, orange CTA lines. It will be accessible by water taxi. It will be walkable for a whole bunch of people who live and work nearby. And yes... it will have parking. It will be built in an up and coming area. It will have great views. It will be near a ton of bars and restaurants. It will include a super cool park/green space for people to hang out. The park will undoubtedly have better seating. It will have better bathrooms. It will have better food options. It will also end the "Will the Sox move to [insert mid-market city]?" discussions that pop up here every once in a while. It should inject some life into the organization and allow them to invest more money into the club in the future. Most importantly, it will most likely be a much more enjoyable place for fans to go for a game. I love going to New Comiskey... but come on, this is going to be so much better.

I'm shocked I keep seeing guys on twitter upset that this doesn't have a roof. Who the hell wants a roof?

Anyone else remember after the ballpark shooting when he was tweeting the name of the poor accountant that set up the LLC associated with ballpark security because he was listed as agent on the Secretary of State website? After implying that guy bore responsibility for security, he had to backtrack once someone told him that being listed as agent of an LLC doesn't mean what he thought. He's constantly jumping the gun and pretending to be an expert in things he knows nothing about. There is no way these professionals and the city have gotten this far and just forgot to account for parking or traffic. A few cool renderings with no further context don't tell the whole story. Will parking ultimately be adequate? Who knows... but any freakout is premature.