To answer the OP's question, they don't want to impress you, they want to do enough to make it look like they tried.

On 12/23/2022 at 7:08 PM, Good Guys said:

I would like to see them to add Michael Wacha.  He was effective in the AL East last year when healthy.  You can never have enough starting pitching IMO.

I’d love White Sox to get Wacha. Is he available? But Jeez, how much would that cost? But really, it would probably be worth it.

1 hour ago, vilehoopster said:

I’d love White Sox to get Wacha. Is he available? But Jeez, how much would that cost? But really, it would probably be worth it.

Yes, he’s a free agent. He was notably better than Clevinger last year, so you have to expect he’s holding out for more money than Clevinger, possibly more than 1 year, and maybe a likely starting spot. 

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

Yes, he’s a free agent. He was notably better than Clevinger last year, so you have to expect he’s holding out for more money than Clevinger, possibly more than 1 year, and maybe a likely starting spot. 

Better last year does not mean better next year.

7 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Better last year does not mean better next year.

And what he wants doesn’t mean what he gets either, but that doesn’t stop his agent from trying to get it. Straight up same contract,  would you have taken Clevinger or Wacha?

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

And what he wants doesn’t mean what he gets either, but that doesn’t stop his agent from trying to get it. Straight up same contract,  would you have taken Clevinger or Wacha?

I’d rather have Clevinger. 

9 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

To answer the OP's question, they don't want to impress you, they want to do enough to make it look like they tried.

Copyright David Sampson.

 

 

5 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

And what he wants doesn’t mean what he gets either, but that doesn’t stop his agent from trying to get it. Straight up same contract,  would you have taken Clevinger or Wacha?

Clevinger 100%.

I don't think he would have been a good fit for several reasons

1. Adding another injury question mark to an Already injury prone roster

2. Adding another questionable defender to the OF mix

Sure there is upside of being a 120-130 ops+ but after that injury that is far from guaranteed so worst case you have a league average bat which misses half the season and is more suited for DH than a corner OF.

I think benintendi is a better solution, little less offensive upside (likely more 100-110 range) but more capable defensively and while there is some Injury risk too it is less than with conforto

1 hour ago, Dominikk85 said:

I don't think he would have been a good fit for several reasons

1. Adding another injury question mark to an Already injury prone roster

2. Adding another questionable defender to the OF mix

Sure there is upside of being a 120-130 ops+ but after that injury that is far from guaranteed so worst case you have a league average bat which misses half the season and is more suited for DH than a corner OF.

I think benintendi is a better solution, little less offensive upside (likely more 100-110 range) but more capable defensively and while there is some Injury risk too it is less than with conforto

This thread was made after Benintendi was already signed. This wasn’t saying sign him instead of Benintendi, It was saying that an outfield of Benintendi/Robert/Colas/Hamilton/Reyes is still not particularly impressive, particularly on the back side. It is difficult to say that assessment is wrong on paper.