5 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said:

I don't know if coming to Chicago will help him not be thick, though. Food is too good.

Texas steaks and baked potatoes couldn’t have been much better, haha.

5 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said:

I don't know if coming to Chicago will help him not be thick, though. Food is too good.

We FINALLY got a Portillo's here, I go like once a week.

16 minutes ago, Tony said:

I fear what I'm about to say is going to turn into another huge debate with some incredibly silly back and forth, but I guess we'll find out. 

When talking about the extensions around those three, I would hope there was a discussion at some point about the makeup of each player, and how they would "respond" to generational wealth before having really any ML experience to speak of. Each player is undoubtably different, but they do all share the unfortunate trait of appearing on the DL far more than the average player, and many of those appearances seemed to be related to muscle strains, pulls and soreness. I think it's fair to question some of the time missed by all three players, and wonder if it looks different if these guys are all playing for their first contract extension at the MLB level. 

The problem for Robert & Moncada is their first contracts were massive and I’m not exactly sure how to think about their extensions impacting their motivation given that factor.  Eloy certainly had less to play for once he agreed to his deal and I do believe he is a guy who likely would have benefited from having a carrot dangled in front of his face each & every year.  But agree, it’s absolutely critical to consider character when doing these extensions because everyone’s will to win is different and that will have significant implications over time.

19 minutes ago, Tony said:

I fear what I'm about to say is going to turn into another huge debate with some incredibly silly back and forth, but I guess we'll find out. 

When talking about the extensions around those three, I would hope there was a discussion at some point about the makeup of each player, and how they would "respond" to generational wealth before having really any ML experience to speak of. Each player is undoubtably different, but they do all share the unfortunate trait of appearing on the DL far more than the average player, and many of those appearances seemed to be related to muscle strains, pulls and soreness. I think it's fair to question some of the time missed by all three players, and wonder if it looks different if these guys are all playing for their first contract extension at the MLB level. 

In most of the cases here that would have been rough to do.  Hard to gauge guys who you don't have a lot of background on coming in from Cuba.  It's not like they can go back and talk to Yoan's high school baseball coach or something.  You pretty much had their years in the minors, and that is it.

8 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

The problem for Robert & Moncada is their first contracts were massive and I’m not exactly sure how to think about their extensions impacting their motivation given that factor.  Eloy certainly had less to play for once he agreed to his deal and I do believe he is a guy who likely would have benefited from having a carrot dangled in front of his face each & every year.  But agree, it’s absolutely critical to consider character when doing these extensions because everyone’s will to win is different and that will have significant implications over time.

I am also just going to say that will to win could well have been crushed by the moves made by the Sox AFTER the extensions, if that was indeed the case.  No way to account for a franchise breaking the will of it's own players.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/02/18/chicago-white-sox-financial-committments-young-prospects/

50 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

My sentence is that this front office does not commit.  The plan before was:

commit early because we trust our evaluation, sign through arb years and maybe a year or two after if the negotiation allows, because we will not commit long term in the open market

this plan did not work, for many reasons, so they have pivoted to:

we aren’t spending/extendind early based on our evaluations, only based on what they have shown at the major league level.  Which, what you state is a 4-5 year window.  Not all players make it to the majors with a 4-5 year window, but let’s pretend they all do.  players have to show something, then be willing to negotiate through arb and maybe a year or two past.  Players don’t do these deals in a vacuum, so what would encourage a young presumably very good player who has shown they can play at the major league level that they should sign an extension with the Sox rather then go to arb every year?  I can’t think of a front office that has explicitly stated that they don’t like to sign long term/high dollar deals louder than the white sox have, so why are you doing anything like that?

so, you then are trusting this minor league system to continue to spit out player after player to replace these players and oh s%*# we are right back to where we started.  Againn

I agree with and understand all of this. Brian Bannister just gave an interview where he talks about this on the pitching side (and SoxMachine addresses in their podcast, today). Strikeouts cost money. So, if it's going to be problematic to keep and extend the K monsters, they have to establish and maintain a steady stream of a few guys a year on the pitching side, pitching away from contact, etc. 

On the hitting side, sure, you might get a guy like Colson Montgomery who get comfortable in a winning situation, and will give a hometown discount, or a hometown right of first refusal. 

 

20 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/02/18/chicago-white-sox-financial-committments-young-prospects/

Now that I read this article, it comes across a bit like Getz is making excuses for the Sox currently low payroll by throwing Hahn under the bus by inferring that his early extensions were questionable.  I realize the Sox currently low payroll is by design but let’s not act like Getz had absolutely nothing to do with the development of Moncada, Eloy, and Robert.  Perhaps he should have known that those guys wouldn’t be the best players to stay motivated after receiving early contract extensions and been in Hahn’s ear about it?

Edited February 18, 20251 yr by WhiteSox2023

11 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Now that I read this article, it comes across a bit like Getz is making excuses for the Sox currently low payroll by throwing Hahn under the bus by inferring that his early extensions were questionable.  I realize the Sox currently low payroll is by design but let’s not act like Getz had absolutely nothing to do with the development of Moncada, Eloy, and Robert.  Perhaps he should have known that those guys wouldn’t be the best players to stay motivated after receiving early contract extensions and been in Hahn’s ear about it?

I think Getz had a lot to do with those guys' development. Moncada and Robert are/were great players. Eloy came to the majors with great promise and fulfilled some of it. He's a clown who gets himself injured. We seem to be pretending that there's some developmental strategy that mind-washes guys into becoming motivational robots. 

The dysfunction across levels and departments has recently been well documented. 

1 hour ago, Tony said:

I fear what I'm about to say is going to turn into another huge debate with some incredibly silly back and forth, but I guess we'll find out. 

When talking about the extensions around those three, I would hope there was a discussion at some point about the makeup of each player, and how they would "respond" to generational wealth before having really any ML experience to speak of. Each player is undoubtably different, but they do all share the unfortunate trait of appearing on the DL far more than the average player, and many of those appearances seemed to be related to muscle strains, pulls and soreness. I think it's fair to question some of the time missed by all three players, and wonder if it looks different if these guys are all playing for their first contract extension at the MLB level. 

I agree. There are many factors that go into signing a player to a long term contract not just talent, whether it be injury history, desire to improve, motivation etc.

Hahn picked the wrong ones.

41 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Now that I read this article, it comes across a bit like Getz is making excuses for the Sox currently low payroll by throwing Hahn under the bus by inferring that his early extensions were questionable.  I realize the Sox currently low payroll is by design but let’s not act like Getz had absolutely nothing to do with the development of Moncada, Eloy, and Robert.  Perhaps he should have known that those guys wouldn’t be the best players to stay motivated after receiving early contract extensions and been in Hahn’s ear about it?

It seemed liked those three developed fine. They were all good in the minors and came up "as advertised." They just couldn't stay on the field and then seemed to get lazy (allegedly). 

10 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said:

It seemed liked those three developed fine. They were all good in the minors and came up "as advertised." They just couldn't stay on the field and then seemed to get lazy (allegedly). 

I wouldn't even call it lazy. Jordan and Kobe were insane with the way they prepped and worked on their games. They'd see something be exposed, then kill it in the off-season. With these guys getting injured, somebody here wrote or posted something about how there's advanced research on the pairings of muscles, and how some people's left side snaps back slower than their right, or something. That can be studied, and both sides can be worked differently to pair with each other, and reduce injury risk. 

That's the kind of thing that you'd think these guys would hire their own guys to discover and fix. The team only has so much control over these guys. And if there was so much dysfunction before Getz, Eloy, Yoan and Robert should have taken it into their own hands and ran with it. 

Edited February 18, 20251 yr by WestEddy

2 hours ago, T R U said:

We FINALLY got a Portillo's here, I go like once a week.

Does it taste the same, because it hasn’t been the same to me since they went worldwide 

5 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Does it taste the same, because it hasn’t been the same to me since they went worldwide 

I agree. I used to love their beefs. Now it's only like it was about half the time.

4 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Does it taste the same, because it hasn’t been the same to me since they went worldwide 

It does not taste exactly like it does when im in Chicago but its damn close. Being able to have it anytime I want is worth that small trade off. 

4 minutes ago, T R U said:

It does not taste exactly like it does when im in Chicago but its damn close. Being able to have it anytime I want is worth that small trade off. 

I can understand that part, close enough is good enough when all you want is a Chicago style dog or a beef

There's one coming to Austin this year sometime too which is great. We just had some Portillos dry iced here. Wasn't too bad for the beef. The hotdogs tasted different. 

7 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I agree. I used to love their beefs. Now it's only like it was about half the time.

Just seems like it’s always the beef that’s been sitting in the tub too long so it’s kind of tough and doesn’t have the same zing 

6 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Just seems like it’s always the beef that’s been sitting in the tub too long so it’s kind of tough and doesn’t have the same zing 

Its like chunky sometimes at the one by me. 

12 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I can understand that part, close enough is good enough when all you want is a Chicago style dog or a beef

The dogs taste exactly the same, which is good. My only issue with the beef is the bread doesn't seem the same. 

Also, when it opened like a month or so ago, they had no sausage on the menu for some weird reason. They just added the sausage and polish like 2 weeks ago.

10 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Its like chunky sometimes at the one by me. 

The restaurant I worked at in Carbondale during college would soak the beef for a minute prior to serving and I must insist that it is the best way to serve it

7 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

The restaurant I worked at in Carbondale during college would soak the beef for a minute prior to serving and I must insist that it is the best way to serve it

Salukiiiiis

34 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Does it taste the same, because it hasn’t been the same to me since they went worldwide 

Buona is far superior now.

19 hours ago, PaleAleSox said:

Buona is far superior now.

Yep.  If you are in the west burbs, try Johnnie’s Beef sometime as well.

Edited February 19, 20251 yr by WhiteSox2023

31 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

The restaurant I worked at in Carbondale during college would soak the beef for a minute prior to serving and I must insist that it is the best way to serve it

When we would order Portillo's to get mailed to us that's what we would do. Heat up the gravy and then you just take your beef and teabag it into the gravy for a little bit and then right onto the bread.