I feel like I would have to be an expert to answer the poll question and I'm not. I do think fans have a tendency to forget what a weak division we play in. They also forget that despite the weak division we had a terrible road record. It wasn't any surprise they lost to Houston. Might've had a shot with the Rodon of the 1st half but realistically it's not just the roster you have to evaluate.

Sox don't have any true superstars of the game. No Trout , Soto, Harper, Acuna ,Altuve, Betts, Correa, Freeman,  Peak Scherzer, Verlander,Kershaw, DeGrom. Eloy or Robert need to have a monster season. Mocada is capable of one. If Abreu is their fatherly influence  the apple has fallen far from the tree to find any Abreu like durability.

Show up , work hard. Celebrating during the season is great entertainment but the biggest celebration of all is the big prize . Stay focused.

Edited March 18, 20224 yr by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

21 hours ago, Texsox said:

After two starters go down and our weak ass system is exposed, we'll be bottom suckers.

So, in thinking about this, you've got a 35 year old fat fuck, another 34 year old, and 2 TJS recoveries in the rotation. Oh yeah, plus the Glory of Vincent Velasquez.

In the OF, 2 of your starters have injury histories. Your 4th OFer has an injury history. Then, you've got your galloping 1B Mastodons in RF. No worries there, amirite?

In the IF, you've got an older guy at 1B, but HUZZAH! Plenty of 1B depth! At 2B, a DFA candidate is the starter, and two stars at SS and 3B.

The pen is well-provisioned, but I guess your one multi-inning type is Lopez, and then we're hoping for Crochet to be the other, without really having stretched him out yet.

 

The point to ask here is not, "are we solid at 7 of 9 positions," but rather, "how close are we to having multiple AAAA-types starting?"

 

Given the injury histories at certain positions, and given the lack of depth elsewhere, this roster isn't too many injuries or DFAs away from being ordinary.

They gotta get another OFer and another SP, IMO. If they dawdle, it'll be Billy Hamilton as OF depth later. If they mosey their way further, get ready for plenty of Lambert shellings.

Edited March 18, 20224 yr by Two-Gun Pete

Whoever said 9+ has no idea what a baseball roster should look like.

I'd vote 2 behind the Dodgers.  The Braves last year were a fluke.  Mets made a lot of great moves but have more holes than us and Lindor could be an issue.  Yankees have bad pitching, astros lost correa, Greinke, and some relievers. Blue Jays have a few offensive holes, like us, but a far worse bullpen.  Rays are the rays, I never like their roster but they keep winning.  Red Sox were a fluke.  Padres roster I like but they have some major financial issues, and Tatis injury issues.  Who am i missing? 

29 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

Whoever said 9+ has no idea what a baseball roster should look like.

Every player has potential. Predicting what their season ultimately looks like is obviously a guess. Some would look at a player like Mercedes and pick the start of the season guy and claim we have a HoF guy stepping in. Others look at his finish and say we have a AA+ guy there. I'm trying to split the middle but I'm leaning pessimistically.

So I'm predicting something like last season where we lose starters for significant stretches of the season (I believe it's realistic). I believe we have a couple key players on a huge upswing in their development and a couple in that inevitable decline. At best they will blame. I also believe we have a manager also in his declining years guiding them through it.

So optimistically top 10, a few injuries away from bottom ten. I think after watching about fifty Sox rosters I know what one looks like. Was last year's roster a top 9? Close. Is this one better? I don't think so. 

12 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Every player has potential. Predicting what their season ultimately looks like is obviously a guess. Some would look at a player like Mercedes and pick the start of the season guy and claim we have a HoF guy stepping in. Others look at his finish and say we have a AA+ guy there. I'm trying to split the middle but I'm leaning pessimistically.

So I'm predicting something like last season where we lose starters for significant stretches of the season (I believe it's realistic). I believe we have a couple key players on a huge upswing in their development and a couple in that inevitable decline. At best they will blame. I also believe we have a manager also in his declining years guiding them through it.

So optimistically top 10, a few injuries away from bottom ten. I think after watching about fifty Sox rosters I know what one looks like. Was last year's roster a top 9? Close. Is this one better? I don't think so. 

Do you think we will have 4 of our starters all out for a large chunk at the exact same time again (Robert, Eloy, Madrigal and Grandal)?  That would be hard to do.

39 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

Do you think we will have 4 of our starters all out for a large chunk at the exact same time again (Robert, Eloy, Madrigal and Grandal)?  That would be hard to do.

No. I don't see Madrigal back on the roster. 

I also don't see three at one time.

I'm guessing two and that is enough to cause a bad stretch.

43 minutes ago, Texsox said:

No. I don't see Madrigal back on the roster. 

I also don't see three at one time.

I'm guessing two and that is enough to cause a bad stretch.

But we’re overestimating the health of our pitching staff holding up moving forward…especially with an abbreviated ST.

2 hours ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

I'd vote 2 behind the Dodgers.  The Braves last year were a fluke.  Mets made a lot of great moves but have more holes than us and Lindor could be an issue.  Yankees have bad pitching, astros lost correa, Greinke, and some relievers. Blue Jays have a few offensive holes, like us, but a far worse bullpen.  Rays are the rays, I never like their roster but they keep winning.  Red Sox were a fluke.  Padres roster I like but they have some major financial issues, and Tatis injury issues.  Who am i missing? 

 

2 hours ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

So, in thinking about this, you've got a 35 year old fat fuck, another 34 year old, and 2 TJS recoveries in the rotation. Oh yeah, plus the Glory of Vincent Velasquez.

In the OF, 2 of your starters have injury histories. Your 4th OFer has an injury history. Then, you've got your galloping 1B Mastodons in RF. No worries there, amirite?

In the IF, you've got an older guy at 1B, but HUZZAH! Plenty of 1B depth! At 2B, a DFA candidate is the starter, and two stars at SS and 3B.

The pen is well-provisioned, but I guess your one multi-inning type is Lopez, and then we're hoping for Crochet to be the other, without really having stretched him out yet.

 

The point to ask here is not, "are we solid at 7 of 9 positions," but rather, "how close are we to having multiple AAAA-types starting?"

 

Given the injury histories at certain positions, and given the lack of depth elsewhere, this roster isn't too many injuries or DFAs away from being ordinary.

They gotta get another OFer and another SP, IMO. If they dawdle, it'll be Billy Hamilton as OF depth later. If they mosey their way further, get ready for plenty of Lambert shellings.

I don't contest with either of these. What does this mean? Who cares what the roster is in March. 

We had a bs year in 21 vis-a-vis injuries. I'd say they're due for a swing of good fortune. Just a feeling I have. Be a man of faith, not of science. 

4 minutes ago, KBX said:

We had a bs year in 21 vis-a-vis injuries. I'd say they're due for a swing of good fortune. Just a feeling I have. Be a man of faith, not of science. 

If memory serves, two things impact future injury likelihood more than other factors:

1. Prior injury history (Think: Eloy, Robert, Engel, Grandal, Kelly, and others)

2. Age (Think: Harrison, Abreu, Grandal, Lynn, Keuchel, and others)

 

I am a man of faith, but faith without action is dead.

Failing to buttress an OF with young talent, but ALSO, plenty of injury history is inviting disaster.

Failing to secure a 2B who has a higher likelihood of positive WAR than a geezing geezer is inviting disaster.

Failing to reinforce a rotation with plenty of age and a lack of depth is inviting disaster.

 

I have faith, but one doesn't have to squint too much to see a repeat of AAAA types all over the OF. One doesn't have to squint too much to see too many Leury starts at 2B. And one doesn't have to squint too much to see too many Lopez/Lambert/Stiever starts.

 

I get that we have talent, and that the offseason isn't done-yet. But we're running out of time and options.

FFS, I'd praise RH if he landed Conforto and, I dunno, Teheran or Pineda? I'd be HAPPY to eat crow if they admitted their fuckups, and fixed them.

 

We'll have to see. 

20 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Saying that the roster is "not young" should not be raining on the parade. 

Look at this another way. The average age of all big leaguers last year was 27.1. Yoan Moncada turns 27 in May, he is basically an "average aged big leaguer". Tim Anderson turns 29 this year - Tim Anderson is 2 years older than the average big leaguer. Lucas Giolito, Zach Collins, Reynaldo lopez - they are older than average big leaguers. Dylan Cease turns 27 in December, he will be older than the average age next year. 

The White Sox have 4 position players (Vaughn, Sheets, Eloy, Robert) who are younger than the average big leaguer, 2 starters, 1 backup (Romy), and 1 reliever (Crochet). Only 8 players on their projected 26 man roster (ignoring suspension) are younger than average big leaguers.

This is a team that should be expected to be peaking literally right now, and there is enough age on this roster that you might think they could be an above-average-injury team. That's as far as you can take that. 

OK, even using 27.1 (an "average age" that has plummeted from over 29 in just the last few years for reasons tied more to tanking and $$ savings than any change in peak performance, and thus a questionable metric for current purposes to begin with):  of the 7 core players I named in my post, 6 are 27 or younger, several by multiple years:  Robert (24), Moncada (26), Jimenez (25), Gio (27), Cease (26), Kopech (25), Vaughn (23).  The other is Tim Anderson at a geriatric 28.  I actually forgot about Crochet (at 22).  If you consider Sheets a member of our core (I don't), he's 25.  This core I identified is quite young, with multiple players who could explode into peak performance at any time, which is the cause of my excitement and was my point from the beginning.     

It sounds like you're talking about something different, which wraps in injury risk to the older players on our team.  That's fine and a valid concern -- but a different conversation.