With the discussion on the other thread, I am curious where Soxtalk actually falls on this topic.  Over or under 49.5 wins?

I’m firmly in the “over” camp. Just seems really hard to win less than 50 games two years in a row. You would need to be very very bad and a bit unlucky. We know they are very very bad, so I’m banking on a few more things going their way this year. 

is 'over 9000' an option? I vote "over 9000". 

It's just had to win less than 50 games. OVER is an easy play. Only 11 teams ALL TIME have won less than that.

Edited December 26, 20241 yr by Squirmin' for Yermin

37 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

I’m firmly in the “over” camp. Just seems really hard to win less than 50 games two years in a row. You would need to be very very bad and a bit unlucky. We know they are very very bad, so I’m banking on a few more things going their way this year. 

 

32 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

It's just had to win less than 50 games. OVER is an easy play. Only 11 teams ALL TIME have won less than that.

It's funny that those of us who would say over 50 is because it's so hard to win under 50 much less two years in a row. I'd say currently the roster screams about 43 wins again. I see the lineup as historically weak and the pitching full of more no names than ever. I wouldn't count on many of them developing quickly. But I have no idea. I wanna see the final roster.

Edited December 26, 20241 yr by greg775

55 wins (maybe...)

They will win 57 games.

The roster is worse than last year but they'll still win more than 50.

6 minutes ago, greg775 said:

 

It's funny that those of us who would say over 50 is because it's so hard to win under 50 much less two years in a row. I'd say currently the roster screams about 43 wins again. I see the lineup as historically weak and the pitching full of more no names than ever. I wouldn't count on many of them developing quickly. But I have no idea. I wanna see the final roster.

Agree, Getz and Reinsdorf haven’t done a damn thing to improve the team from last year’s disaster, if they trade Benintendi and Robert this will be the lowest payroll in MLB and quite possibly the lowest in recent memory.

 

 

.

47 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

Agree, Getz and Reinsdorf haven’t done a damn thing to improve the team from last year’s disaster, if they trade Benintendi and Robert this will be the lowest payroll in MLB and quite possibly the lowest in recent memory.

 

 

.

They had the lowest payroll in baseball during one of the years during the first rebuild, don't remember the year, it may have been 2018. And they were among the lowest in a few other years during that time period. 

I'm hoping if they trade Robert their betting line will move down 1-2 wins and then I'll jump

1 hour ago, maxjusttyped said:

The roster is worse than last year but they'll still win more than 50.

Yeah, they were obviously incredibly bad last year, but you need a lot of bad luck to lose that many games. Plus, didn't the bullpen blow like 35 or something games when they were winning in the 6th or later?

63 wins. 

They're starting out with a better whole rotation than '24, better bullpen, new manager, rookies competing for jobs instead of lifetime under-achievers getting injured in the first 11 games. They also have their RF and 5th starter in camp from the beginning.

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

They had the lowest payroll in baseball during one of the years during the first rebuild, don't remember the year, it may have been 2018. And they were among the lowest in a few other years during that time period. 

$72 million opening day payroll in 2018.  This upcoming season will be even lower.  A new low for Jerry to reach.

2 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

They had the lowest payroll in baseball during one of the years during the first rebuild, don't remember the year, it may have been 2018. And they were among the lowest in a few other years during that time period. 

Just a crime for a big market club.

39 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

$72 million opening day payroll in 2018.  This upcoming season will be even lower.  A new low for Jerry to reach.

Probably damn proud of it.

1 hour ago, WestEddy said:

63 wins. 

They're starting out with a better whole rotation than '24, better bullpen, new manager, rookies competing for jobs instead of lifetime under-achievers getting injured in the first 11 games. They also have their RF and 5th starter in camp from the beginning.

I am stuck on which way to go on 49.5, but I would l put gregs houses I have won from him on under  63.

Over. 

1 hour ago, PaleAleSox said:

Yeah, they were obviously incredibly bad last year, but you need a lot of bad luck to lose that many games. Plus, didn't the bullpen blow like 35 or something games when they were winning in the 6th or later?

They lost 27 games this past season where they took a lead into the 7th inning or later.

13 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

Just a crime for a big market club.

Except JR doesn't consider them a "big market" club for various reasons some of which are personal. 

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I am stuck on which way to go on 49.5, but I would l put gregs houses I have won from him on under  63.

At this point, I agree with greg that it's too far out. I guess I really feel about 53-54, but dream big, right?

I went with the over but honestly I wouldn't put any money on that.

Going with 55-107...one game behind the Royals' pace two seasons ago.

That seems optimistic considering they had Witt, Singer, Perez, Pasquantino, later in the season Ragans.

89

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

I am stuck on which way to go on 49.5, but I would l put gregs houses I have won from him on under  63.

I voted under, but I could see anywhere in the 48 to 52 range. Short of a few unforeseen breakout performances, 60 wins feels like a stretch. But with so many unknowns I wouldn't be surprised by wins in the mid 40s or low 50s.