36 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

1. But they brought in leadership. That's always a good thing. How could it suck massive balls when there was leadership? That's the benefit of this signing, right? Leadership. Why else would it keep getting mentioned? It's always a positive. They brought in leadership and 2024 was the successful result.

2. What does that matter?

1. You're the one who keeps mentioning leadership. 

2. I'm guessing you drink for a living. 

13 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Even if mediocre vets like Slater and Tauchman have good first halves, you aren’t getting back much of anything for them.  These aren’t true one year “flip” candidates.  Flip candidates are guys who have been good in the past and had a down year.  These are cheap vets that were never really good players.  Instead of signing these two scrubs, sign Austin Hays to a one year deal and see what he can do.  Hays is a flip candidate.

Giving the younger outfielders that you mentioned above those at bats is worth more than the lottery tickets you are going to get back for Slater and Tauchman, if you even get anything for them at all.

What the hell is Getz’s game plan here?  Does he even have a strategy?

His strategy is to do whatever JR tells him to do. 

6 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

1. You're the one who keeps mentioning leadership. 

2. I'm guessing you drink for a living. 

In reply to a post calling him a "clubhouse presence" and "Veteran stopgap" as a justification for signing him.

Thanks for the personal attack, I'll go a lot harsher next time you defend Getz.

3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

In reply to a post calling him a "clubhouse presence" and "Veteran stopgap" as a justification for signing him.

Thanks for the personal attack, I'll go a lot harsher next time you defend Getz.

Isn’t it funny how the very poster who cries about personal attacks the most is the one who dishes them out the most?

7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Oh so last year the leadership "prevented a full mutiny"?

Name a business where you actually bring in people from other businesses successfully just for leadership, but without putting them in managerial roles or giving them any instructions, support, or training from the corporate level. Your, I dunno, stock person in a warehouse driving a forklift is supposed to be the leader that the organization needs.

Yeah, I think having some decent vets around helped prevent the clubhouse from imploding.  Being the worst team in baseball history while also having an incompetent boob for manager will certainly test your limits.  I didn’t read or hear much about any in-fighting amongst the players like there was in 2023.

As for your second question, not sure I’m following.  Tauchman wasn’t just brought in for “leadership”.  He was a productive role player last year who is coming in dirt cheap.  He likely makes the team better.  Again, I will wait and see if there are other moves before worrying about him blocking someone.

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

In reply to a post calling him a "clubhouse presence" and "Veteran stopgap" as a justification for signing him.

Thanks for the personal attack, I'll go a lot harsher next time you defend Getz.

Unless they're signing Milton Bradley, pretty much every single player is called a clubhouse leader. That's the thing about older guys. They have a little more maturity, and have learned how to focus on their job. 

Again, if you don't like the Tauchman signing, have at it. All you're doing is lashing out at the person who posted "clubhouse presence". 

12 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

In reply to a post calling him a "clubhouse presence" and "Veteran stopgap" as a justification for signing him.

Thanks for the personal attack, I'll go a lot harsher next time you defend Getz.

He is both a veteran and a stopgap unless we extend him.  Again, not sure what you are arguing at this point?  For the sake of others, I will remove myself from this debate because it’s not adding anything of value.

 

i can't wait to dislike this guy next season.

15 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

 

would you take $250K if they told you you cant have tavern cut for 5 months

Looking at his splits in his career (and the last 2 years for recency), he actually doesn't look the guy who we be platooned in the OF.

14 hours ago, hi8is said:

For everyone we sign, my response is… who?

I'm just going to assume that they are a new member of the Soxtalk community until I watch/listen to a game next year and ask "when did we get this guy??"

36 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

 

So barely above league min unless he earns performance based incentives. And some people are up in arms about this move? Lol

24 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Looking at his splits in his career (and the last 2 years for recency), he actually doesn't look the guy who we be platooned in the OF.

2.8 fWAR over the past two seasons. The guy a bunch of people are pining for, Austin Hayes, is at 2.7 fWAR over the past two seasons. Similar WAR/PA across both their careers. Yes, Hays is younger but he also has less CF experience and will certainly command a higher salary.

This explains why we weren't in the Soto sweepstakes 

8 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

2.8 fWAR over the past two seasons. The guy a bunch of people are pining for, Austin Hayes, is at 2.7 fWAR over the past two seasons. Similar WAR/PA across both their careers. Yes, Hays is younger but he also has less CF experience and will certainly command a higher salary.

Looking at his defensive numbers, I don't think Tauchman will be in CF. His numbers across the OF look bad.

22 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

So barely above league min unless he earns performance based incentives. And some people are up in arms about this move? Lol

To be fair, I don’t think the gripe has been about the $, but more about roster construction, playing time, etc.

30 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

So barely above league min unless he earns performance based incentives. And some people are up in arms about this move? Lol

I don't think anyone is really "up in arms." Just that he doesn't really do anything. Blocks someone else who you should probably play every day to see what you have and probably not a guy that won't bring back much in a trade in July if he does good.

Edit: hope I'm wrong on that last part and the perfect scenario happens where they actually do get something interesting.

Edited December 10, 20241 yr by Bob Sacamano

6 minutes ago, Snopek said:

To be fair, I don’t think the gripe has been about the $, but more about roster construction, playing time, etc.

I don’t see 3 better options on the mlb or milb rosters for 2025 and he isn’t blocking some highly touted OF prospect either

Edited December 10, 20241 yr by JUSTgottaBELIEVE

19 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Looking at his defensive numbers, I don't think Tauchman will be in CF. His numbers across the OF look bad.

He played some CF for the Cubs the last two years. I’m not saying he will be the primary CF on the Sox but he at least has the ability, unlike Gavin Sheets who didn’t have the ability to play any outfield position.

1 hour ago, TitoMB345 said:

i can't wait to dislike this guy next season.

Why wait? I already dislike him. 

He would have had the best OPS+ on the team last year except for Moncada who played like 8 games.  He'll be the new Tommy Pham.  Just because someone is described as being a vet or having leadership qualities doesn't mean they are all Maldanado.  

Again, they suck and they will suck again next year.  If Tauchman is in the top 10 things to complain about next year, something has gone right. 

1 hour ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Looking at his splits in his career (and the last 2 years for recency), he actually doesn't look the guy who we be platooned in the OF.

Yeah, pretty even splits IIRC.

Also, I think I saw someone mention race/whiteness being some factor in being called a leader.  That's absurd.  Maldanado, Abreu, Grandal, TA were all called "leaders" at some point in the last few years. 

This is baseball.  There is a lot of dumb s%*# that people say.  Anyone who is over 27 and goes to a bad team will be called a "leader" unless they have some notable behavior issues that are public. 

It's like if someone was upset because they kept acquiring guys who "give 110%" because it will lead to exhaustion and injury.  Its all nonsense.

If we have to fill it out with vets, I'm cool with fan favorites.