I’m tired of these types of posts

[champagne030]

2 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Maybe you didnt notice that the lecture thread just started was someone tired of posts about incremental steps foward which has to happen after you reach rock bottom. No one is throwing a party. It's just hey Im enjoying things more than last year. Maybe you want to segregate Soxtalk into Poohs and Eeyores sections where we all hang out with our own kind so the Eeyores in charge don't remove posts of the forward looking people or accuse them of gaslighting.

I guaranteed the Jedi section would have more people starting game threads and rooting for victories while the Eeyores continue to ignore game threads like they have been. You know who you are. 

I'm sure there are people who consider themselves in the middle . Just remember if you're still here yelling fire Getz and Colson is a bum every day that youll be here jumping on the bandwagon once it starts gaining momentum. Sorry if some of you can't acknowledge the momentum has started already because the previous rebuild broke your wittle hearts. 

You need to accept Getz sucks and is a massive part of how the Sox made history last season and will have the 2nd worst record in MLB this season.  We're not last this year!!!!!!!!!!

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

21 minutes ago, champagne030 said:

You need to accept Getz sucks and is a massive part of how the Sox made history last season and will have the 2nd worst record in MLB this season.  We're not last this year!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, putting Getz and colson in the same sentence is offensive to colson. 

[nrockway]

I genuinely think it's amusing that a bunch of people with the exact same (rare and dying) hobby, posting about a baseball team on an internet forum, are so vitriolic. Some more than others. It's like, chill out, it's not that serious. Definitely doesn't need to be personal.

2 hours ago, champagne030 said:

You need to accept Getz sucks and is a massive part of how the Sox made history last season and will have the 2nd worst record in MLB this season.  We're not last this year!!!!!!!!!!

Don't think I need to accept that. It takes years to build a team. The actual record is pretty irrelevant, it's not like it carries over. Frankly, this season I'd rather have a top draft pick than 'barely' missing the playoffs. I've seen enough of that garbage with the Bulls.

A rebuilding team is obviously going to be bad, it's a question of 'is the organization itself more effective than it was under the previous GM?' It seems hard to argue against that. At the very least, it's hard to argue that Getz is worse than Hahn/Kenny. Based on what we can see publicly, the Sox are doing the sorts of things that 'modern' organizations do. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, this has been discussed plenty on the forum and you could read my perspective in the 'fire Getz' thread.

An additional point would be, look at the below list of GMs who have been hired since Getz. Many of these teams look clearly worse and blowing a contending window. Bendix seems like a good hire, a different forum poster convinced me of that point. Maybe Greenberg. Stearns seems totally overrated. Would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead? Somebody should make that point, I'd listen to it.

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, nrockway said:

I genuinely think it's amusing that a bunch of people with the exact same (rare and dying) hobby, posting about a baseball team on an internet forum, are so vitriolic. Some more than others. It's like, chill out, it's not that serious. Definitely doesn't need to be personal.

Don't think I need to accept that. It takes years to build a team. The actual record is pretty irrelevant, it's not like it carries over. Frankly, this season I'd rather have a top draft pick than 'barely' missing the playoffs. I've seen enough of that garbage with the Bulls.

A rebuilding team is obviously going to be bad, it's a question of 'is the organization itself more effective than it was under the previous GM?' It seems hard to argue against that. At the very least, it's hard to argue that Getz is worse than Hahn/Kenny. Based on what we can see publicly, the Sox are doing the sorts of things that 'modern' organizations do. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, this has been discussed plenty on the forum and you could read my perspective in the 'fire Getz' thread.

An additional point would be, look at the below list of GMs who have been hired since Getz. Many of these teams look clearly worse and blowing a contending window. Bendix seems like a good hire, a different forum poster convinced me of that point. Maybe Greenberg. Stearns seems totally overrated. Would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead? Somebody should make that point, I'd listen to it.

Depends on their budget.

I’d probably have three lists….payrolls of under $145 million, $146-199 million and those who could trusted with over $200 million.

As of today, easy to say anyone from the Brewers, Tigers, Reds, Mariners, Rays, Orioles, Braves, Guardians, etc.

For the next five years, there definitely won’t be an open spigot of FA dollars flowing.

Edited August 25 by caulfield12

[bmags]

9 hours ago, nrockway said:

I genuinely think it's amusing that a bunch of people with the exact same (rare and dying) hobby, posting about a baseball team on an internet forum, are so vitriolic. Some more than others. It's like, chill out, it's not that serious. Definitely doesn't need to be personal.

Don't think I need to accept that. It takes years to build a team. The actual record is pretty irrelevant, it's not like it carries over. Frankly, this season I'd rather have a top draft pick than 'barely' missing the playoffs. I've seen enough of that garbage with the Bulls.

A rebuilding team is obviously going to be bad, it's a question of 'is the organization itself more effective than it was under the previous GM?' It seems hard to argue against that. At the very least, it's hard to argue that Getz is worse than Hahn/Kenny. Based on what we can see publicly, the Sox are doing the sorts of things that 'modern' organizations do. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, this has been discussed plenty on the forum and you could read my perspective in the 'fire Getz' thread.

An additional point would be, look at the below list of GMs who have been hired since Getz. Many of these teams look clearly worse and blowing a contending window. Bendix seems like a good hire, a different forum poster convinced me of that point. Maybe Greenberg. Stearns seems totally overrated. Would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead? Somebody should make that point, I'd listen to it.

Can you imagine writing this post to any other fan base, and holding up a team that has a .300 win percentage since Getz took over and being like "Sheesh wouldn't you rather have Getz than these schlubs?"

[nrockway]

12 minutes ago, bmags said:

Can you imagine writing this post to any other fan base, and holding up a team that has a .300 win percentage since Getz took over and being like "Sheesh wouldn't you rather have Getz than these schlubs?"

Well, I didn't write "sheesh wouldn't you rather have Getz than these schlubs?" I wrote "would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead?".

You could respond to what I wrote instead of, I dunno, somethin' you made up. caulfield did. It's probably a more interesting discussion. And less rude to me.

[Tony]

On 7/13/2025 at 7:00 PM, nrockway said:

Ok so prove it then, Tony. Write a thoughtful post, "global moderator", not one line of s%*# talk. Set the tone for your website.

David Stearns v Chris Getz is a genuine line of discussion and this is your response. Thinking people might find it interesting. Illiterate perspective and surprising.

 

On 7/13/2025 at 7:17 PM, Tony said:

1. A lot of words doesn’t make it a “thoughtful” post. In this case, it gave you more of an opportunity to say things that were rooted in craziness. 

2. I’ll make it easy. Say MLB decided to shake things up, and said every team is getting a new GM. Each team submits a list of 5 GM’s they want, any team can select any executive they want.

How many lists does Stearns make, how many does Getz make? 

The guy that was the GM for 4 straight playoff appearances for the Brewers and a .536 winning percentage? Or the guy currently rocking a .293 winning percentage and currently holds the distinction of being the GM behind the worst team of all-time? 
 

And to be clear, YOU made the comparison of Stearns vs. Getz. Not sure what measurement system you’re using to evaluate GM performance. I’d say I’d love to hear it, but that would be a lie. 

 

14 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Well, I didn't write "sheesh wouldn't you rather have Getz than these schlubs?" I wrote "would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead?".

You could respond to what I wrote instead of, I dunno, somethin' you made up. caulfield did. It's probably a more interesting discussion. And less rude to me.

You did this entire bit like a month ago. I responded, as did others, but you never did. You asked for a comparison, it was given...then you checked out. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Can't believe how many times Getz has been compared to Stearns on this board. 

Also, this is Getz second year while most of those guys are still in their first. In Getz first year he set the record for worst team in MLB history. None of the guys you are critiquing have come close to that level of ineptitude. In fact, everyone on that list is better than this year's White Sox after the great "progress year" from Getz. Pretty funny.

[T R U]

Im tired of those posts HERE by fans, I can at least understand Garfein because its his job and he can't just tweet out "The Sox still suck, but at least they aren't historically bad anymore". I can't get behind some other fan trying to tell me "They've been playing .400 ball since June" like that's supposed to instill optimism, that flat out sucks.  

We all understand this is a 100 loss team, and probably will be a 100 loss team again next season without any meaningful additions. The young offensive players have shown very well this year, I would say I expect them all to improve next year as well but we've already seen one core all bottom out together so I don't want to get too ahead of myself. 

[FloydBannister1983]

15 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Can't believe how many times Getz has been compared to Stearns on this board. 

Also, this is Getz second year while most of those guys are still in their first. In Getz first year he set the record for worst team in MLB history. None of the guys you are critiquing have come close to that level of ineptitude. In fact, everyone on that list is better than this year's White Sox after the great "progress year" from Getz. Pretty funny.

Also is it really just Getz's second year?  The stated intent was to make it a seamless transition, ergo no GM search.  So it's clear the past failures can also be attributed to Getz to some degree.

[bmags]

6 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Well, I didn't write "sheesh wouldn't you rather have Getz than these schlubs?" I wrote "would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead?".

You could respond to what I wrote instead of, I dunno, somethin' you made up. caulfield did. It's probably a more interesting discussion. And less rude to me.

My point is you are holding other teams to a higher standard than you hold the white sox to.

But, of that group, Mattingly and Fenstermaker and Minasian aren't key baseball decisionmakers so they don't count. I don't real

Over 2.5 years, aside from being unable to scout waiver wire and vet min free agent talent to avoid the worst record of all time, there are 2 points where you can look at now and say "did Getz set us up for success more than these GMs?"
- The 2024 draft, especially the 1st round, where Getz drafted Hagen Smith at 6th overall, who now is struggling mightily with command, instead of multiple top hitters including #1 overall prospect.
- Farm System: 18th
- Major League Team record


- Jeremy Zoll Twins: 

- 2024 First Round Draft Pick (#21) took Kaelen Culpepper who has a .900 OPS in AA
- Has the 4th best farm according to BA
- 82-80 record last year
Would I take Jeremy Zoll over Getz? Yes.

Peter Bendix Marlins
- 2024 First Round Draft PIck (#16) PJ Morlando - least impressive of stats, but holding head above water in A ball with a .750 ops
- Farm System: 13th
- MLB Record Last Year: 62-100 (21 games above white sox)
- MLB Record This Year: 61-69 (14 games above white sox)
Would I take Peter Bendix over Chris Getz? Yes

Craig Breslow
Obviously yes.


David Stearns
First - in David Stearns first rebuild with the Marlins he created a near playoff team with waiver wire pickups and scrubs, they didn't lose 120 games, so just with that resume I'd say yes.
Farm System: #9
Record in 2024: Made Playoffs with 89 wins
Record in 2025: 69-61 (2nd place)
2024 Draft: Drafted Carson Benge (19th overall), hitting .900 OPS in AA
Would I take David Stearns? Yes

Brad Meador
Farm System: 10th
Record in 2024: 77-85
Record in 2025: 68-63
2024 Draft: Drafted Chase Burns, a top pitcher that actually dominated minors and is pitching in majors this year.
Would I take Brad Meador? Yes

The weird Giants set-up, is one you could argue could struggle. Yet with a worse draft position, took a player they parlayed into Rafael Devers. Their farm system, still better than the sox and surging at lower levels. 

Getz has done some good things, but tearing things down to the studs and then having some young players in year 2 playing like potential starters is not really out of the ordinary for baseball. 

Getz has been here for 2.5 years. This draft looks solid. Last looks like it was a huge miss for no reason. The Cease trade was a huge miss.

As a result, we have the 18th ranked farm despite the worst record in the AL. 2.5 years in. And if it's because all of these guys that have graduated, you'd still want better on field results than we have, there's a LOT more team to build yet we have the 18th best farm. 

It's just not good enough yet, and Getz showing an inability to find passable talent to avoid catastrophe last year is a warning even for a 'built up' team.

[T R U]

Just now, FloydBannister1983 said:

Also is it really just Getz's second year?  The stated intent was to make it a seamless transition, ergo no GM search.  So it's clear the past failures can also be attributed to Getz to some degree.

Getz has been here since 2017, was promoted to assistant GM in 2021, and was only promoted to GM because he was supposed to already be familiar with the entire organization and that would make this go much faster than hiring from outside. That strategy turned into the worst team in MLB history, so there's that. 

I will never understand how someone who was responsible for player development and then assistant GM didn't deserve to be fired for the disaster that happened here. And if he had all these different views and ideas that the old regime was doing wrong, that speaks volumes to just how dysfunctional this organization is if their own inner workings aren't even aligned. 

[WestEddy]

25 minutes ago, T R U said:

I can't get behind some other fan trying to tell me "They've been playing .400 ball since June" like that's supposed to instill optimism, that flat out sucks.  

When I note that the Sox have a certain winning percentage since May 1, I'm generally saying that in a discussion to set a baseline of what I believe you might expect from this current roster playing 162. I'm not trying to make you "feel better". 

So much discussion gets tackled with "I can't believe we're comparing Getz to a guy who was available and hired 31 days after him", or "oh, you mentioned a record, like I'm supposed to feel great about that?"

Edited August 25 by WestEddy

[nrockway]

33 minutes ago, Tony said:

 

 

You did this entire bit like a month ago. I responded, as did others, but you never did. You asked for a comparison, it was given...then you checked out. 

I actually did write a response but didn't hit submit because it needed editing and didn't have the time then lol...or maybe that was the thread about sample sizes. Either way, I wasn't referring to you. You don't put words in posters' mouths. You shut me up certainly. I'm probably not going to reply to this thread for a while after this post, I'd like to post on SoxTalk all day, but we're not all of retired and sometimes the discussion moves on. Or I forget. I'm not looking for a fight or to put anyone down, but for some amount of objectivity. And also just a generally kinder tone. I'm not always the best at that, but dang this place is pretty hostile sometimes. I think it's pretty clear that the team is in a better state now than when we were .500. Ample evidence that this organization is moving out of the stone age via outside hires, biomechanics staff, a new facility in the DR etc.

 

11 minutes ago, bmags said:

My point is you are holding other teams to a higher standard than you hold the white sox to.

But, of that group, Mattingly and Fenstermaker and Minasian aren't key baseball decisionmakers so they don't count. I don't real

Over 2.5 years, aside from being unable to scout waiver wire and vet min free agent talent to avoid the worst record of all time, there are 2 points where you can look at now and say "did Getz set us up for success more than these GMs?"
- The 2024 draft, especially the 1st round, where Getz drafted Hagen Smith at 6th overall, who now is struggling mightily with command, instead of multiple top hitters including #1 overall prospect.
- Farm System: 18th
- Major League Team record


- Jeremy Zoll Twins: 

- 2024 First Round Draft Pick (#21) took Kaelen Culpepper who has a .900 OPS in AA
- Has the 4th best farm according to BA
- 82-80 record last year
Would I take Jeremy Zoll over Getz? Yes.

Peter Bendix Marlins
- 2024 First Round Draft PIck (#16) PJ Morlando - least impressive of stats, but holding head above water in A ball with a .750 ops
- Farm System: 13th
- MLB Record Last Year: 62-100 (21 games above white sox)
- MLB Record This Year: 61-69 (14 games above white sox)
Would I take Peter Bendix over Chris Getz? Yes

Craig Breslow
Obviously yes.


David Stearns
First - in David Stearns first rebuild with the Marlins he created a near playoff team with waiver wire pickups and scrubs, they didn't lose 120 games, so just with that resume I'd say yes.
Farm System: #9
Record in 2024: Made Playoffs with 89 wins
Record in 2025: 69-61 (2nd place)
2024 Draft: Drafted Carson Benge (19th overall), hitting .900 OPS in AA
Would I take David Stearns? Yes

Brad Meador
Farm System: 10th
Record in 2024: 77-85
Record in 2025: 68-63
2024 Draft: Drafted Chase Burns, a top pitcher that actually dominated minors and is pitching in majors this year.
Would I take Brad Meador? Yes

The weird Giants set-up, is one you could argue could struggle. Yet with a worse draft position, took a player they parlayed into Rafael Devers. Their farm system, still better than the sox and surging at lower levels. 

Getz has done some good things, but tearing things down to the studs and then having some young players in year 2 playing like potential starters is not really out of the ordinary for baseball. 

Getz has been here for 2.5 years. This draft looks solid. Last looks like it was a huge miss for no reason. The Cease trade was a huge miss.

As a result, we have the 18th ranked farm despite the worst record in the AL. 2.5 years in. And if it's because all of these guys that have graduated, you'd still want better on field results than we have, there's a LOT more team to build yet we have the 18th best farm. 

It's just not good enough yet, and Getz showing an inability to find passable talent to avoid catastrophe last year is a warning even for a 'built up' team.

Good post that I can't really look at right now. Tonight.

[T R U]

11 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

When I note that the Sox have a certain winning percentage since May 1, I'm generally saying that in a discussion to set a baseline of what I believe you might expect from this current roster playing 162. I'm not trying to make you "feel better". 

So much discussion gets tackled with "I can't believe we're comparing Getz to a guy who was available and hired 31 days after him", or "oh, you mentioned a record, like I'm supposed to feel great about that?"

You're trying to set a baseline that this current roster is just bad instead of historically bad? That was the point of this thread, bad is getting passed as acceptable because at least its not historically bad anymore. 

[Jake]

Here was my approach to what would constitute success for this season:

1. Don't set another losses record

2. Accumulate young players playing well enough at the MLB level that they can reasonably be expected to play on future competitive Sox teams (at least if you stipulate that such a team will appear in the next few years)

 

So far, I feel pretty good to be honest with you. Obviously we knocked out #1, as so many posts like the OP can point out. Besides that, there's a cadre of players 25 or younger with 5+ years until free agency who are playing rather competently:

• Lenyn Sosa
• Kyle Teel
• Chase Meidroth
• Colson Montgomery
• Miguel Vargas
• Edgar Quero

in no particular order. Brooks Baldwin has shown a few flashes at the plate. Team just acquired Curtis Mead, who certainly has the raw hitting talent to be an impact player. Quite frankly, it's remarkable how basically every position player prospect to taste the majors this year has succeeded (I don't count Baldwin as a prospect in that sense). Plenty of positive developments among minor league hitters as well, with Braden Montgomery now showing well in AA, Caleb Bonemer emerging as a serious prospect in the low minors, Jeral Perez showing some pop, Javier Mogollon looking good, William Bergolla looking like a future (bench) MLBer, even Sammy Zavala making a late season surge back into relevance. Jacob Gonzalez is hardly a success story but I'd say he took a step forward this year and has a reasonable chance to find a minor role on a big league roster down the line. Among the prospect hitters, Bryan Ramos's season is the main one I count as a serious disappointment.

Pitching side is a different story on all levels. Shane Smith is a very nice feather in the cap despite the inconsistencies. Davis Martin has had a somewhat up and down year but looks like a useful player. Cannon qualifies as a disappointment but I think he still has a shot to be an innings eater. I'm not a big Burke fan but he's held his own and might make it as a starter with some reason to believe he could successfully convert to relief pitching. Yoendrys Gomez is an interesting late-season bright spot; I still see him as a reliever long term but his little run as a starter has been legit so far. Grant Taylor isn't on track to be a dominant ace-level starter but he looks the part as a shutdown reliever. Jordan Leasure catches a lot of s%*# but he's looking more and more like a solid setup man to me. After that, the MLB bullpen has been pieced together with older guys who have largely spun their wheels.

The minor leagues don't offer a ton of inspiration pitching-wise. Some interesting guys for sure, like Oppor down in the low minors. I'm interested in Riley Gowens as well. A couple other of the dudes having great years in AA I'm not very optimistic about as major league prospects. McDougal has a chance I think. We all know the ways in which the big two lefties have disappointed; that said, it wouldn't really shock me if either or both just suddenly click and push their way to the majors next year. But much worse possibilities are also looking plausible. Wikelman Gonzalez looks like crap to me and it seems the Sox gave up on his potential as a starter quickly, but given the iffy looking stuff I can kind of see why. Jairo Iriarte has completely fallen apart in a way that feels unexamined for a guy who seemed to be on track to potentially join the MLB rotation this year if things went right. Nick Nastrini, who some might remember looked like a potential rotation piece a year ago, is out of the organization and appears to have the yips. There are some Peyton Pallette fans out there but I'm not really one of them. But his progression is a mild positive I suppose.

All that is to say I don't think the Sox got much clarity on what the medium-term pitching staff looks like. That said, pitching staffs have a tendency to be built as the plane flies so I don't feel as badly about it. There are some signs to me that the Sox may have some ability to make chicken dinner out of chicken s%*# on the pitching side. I'd rather have a bunch of young hitters looking like legit major leaguers while the pitching staff looks sketchy than the other way around.

[almagest]

11 hours ago, nrockway said:

I genuinely think it's amusing that a bunch of people with the exact same (rare and dying) hobby, posting about a baseball team on an internet forum, are so vitriolic. Some more than others. It's like, chill out, it's not that serious. Definitely doesn't need to be personal.

Don't think I need to accept that. It takes years to build a team. The actual record is pretty irrelevant, it's not like it carries over. Frankly, this season I'd rather have a top draft pick than 'barely' missing the playoffs. I've seen enough of that garbage with the Bulls.

A rebuilding team is obviously going to be bad, it's a question of 'is the organization itself more effective than it was under the previous GM?' It seems hard to argue against that. At the very least, it's hard to argue that Getz is worse than Hahn/Kenny. Based on what we can see publicly, the Sox are doing the sorts of things that 'modern' organizations do. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, this has been discussed plenty on the forum and you could read my perspective in the 'fire Getz' thread.

An additional point would be, look at the below list of GMs who have been hired since Getz. Many of these teams look clearly worse and blowing a contending window. Bendix seems like a good hire, a different forum poster convinced me of that point. Maybe Greenberg. Stearns seems totally overrated. Would the White Sox be measurably better if they hired any one of these other dudes instead? Somebody should make that point, I'd listen to it.

Right now, the guy who I would say fits "the Sox royally screwed up by not hiring him" is Bendix.

[Tony]

I'm prefacing this post by saying I know it will never happen because it's impossible to do with a sports fan base, but with that out the way...

These discussions about Getz/overall performance will never end, not at least things get turned around and there is actual winning happening on a regular basis. 

But I feel like a lot of these discussion revolve around timeframes. Those that are "defending" Getz or in the more positive camp, cite the improvement from last year, growth from younger players, etc. Which is all true. 

But my question is how do we somewhat align on expectations? We know Getz inherited a bad situation, don't think many argued a full demo job wasn't needed. And that takes time. But how much time? 

What is an appropriate enough time to actually see a winning record from the Sox? We'll be heading into the 2026 season and the Sox haven't had a winning season since 2021. We know when Getz took over (Late August of 2023) so 2024 and 2025 have been full "Getz years" The 2026 season will be his third full year on the job. At what point in the process do we expect the Sox to be actually competitive? 

 

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, T R U said:

You're trying to set a baseline that this current roster is just bad instead of historically bad? That was the point of this thread, bad is getting passed as acceptable because at least its not historically bad anymore. 

NO!

When I'm in a discussion with someone about whether it's worth keeping Robert, or whatnot, it's good to talk about where they are in wins, and how much a guy like Robert adds, or whatever. Every single conversation doesn't have to be about how the Sox are bad. If you want everybody on the internet to shut up and just talk in terms of how bad the Sox are, and will be, maybe the internet isn't for you. 

[WestEddy]

41 minutes ago, Tony said:

I'm prefacing this post by saying I know it will never happen because it's impossible to do with a sports fan base, but with that out the way...

These discussions about Getz/overall performance will never end, not at least things get turned around and there is actual winning happening on a regular basis. 

But I feel like a lot of these discussion revolve around timeframes. Those that are "defending" Getz or in the more positive camp, cite the improvement from last year, growth from younger players, etc. Which is all true. 

But my question is how do we somewhat align on expectations? We know Getz inherited a bad situation, don't think many argued a full demo job wasn't needed. And that takes time. But how much time? 

What is an appropriate enough time to actually see a winning record from the Sox? We'll be heading into the 2026 season and the Sox haven't had a winning season since 2021. We know when Getz took over (Late August of 2023) so 2024 and 2025 have been full "Getz years" The 2026 season will be his third full year on the job. At what point in the process do we expect the Sox to be actually competitive? 

 

I would expect the Sox to be winning somewhere in the 70's next season, clearing .500 in 2027, and "competing" in 2028. 

I would show my work, but every time I say where I think this team is per 162, the usual crew complains that I'm trying to make them feel good, or that I'm not prefacing every sentence with "Getz didn't deserve his job" or "the Sox will perpetually set the loss record every single year". 

[Lip Man 1]

2 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I would expect the Sox to be winning somewhere in the 70's next season, clearing .500 in 2027, and "competing" in 2028. 

I would show my work, but every time I say where I think this team is per 162, the usual crew complains that I'm trying to make them feel good, or that I'm not prefacing every sentence with "Getz didn't deserve his job" or "the Sox will perpetually set the loss record every single year". 

Have to disagree with you on all counts. Barring something unexpected JR is still going to be around and the upcoming labor impasse will throw the 2027 season into doubt.. 

[JoeC]

1. This team sucks.

2. This team is better than last year’s team.

3. This team shows some form of future upside in some areas, whereas last year’s team was 100% hopeless.

4. This team still sucks.

I am still enjoying this season based almost solely on #3 above.

[almagest]

57 minutes ago, Tony said:

I'm prefacing this post by saying I know it will never happen because it's impossible to do with a sports fan base, but with that out the way...

These discussions about Getz/overall performance will never end, not at least things get turned around and there is actual winning happening on a regular basis. 

But I feel like a lot of these discussion revolve around timeframes. Those that are "defending" Getz or in the more positive camp, cite the improvement from last year, growth from younger players, etc. Which is all true. 

But my question is how do we somewhat align on expectations? We know Getz inherited a bad situation, don't think many argued a full demo job wasn't needed. And that takes time. But how much time? 

What is an appropriate enough time to actually see a winning record from the Sox? We'll be heading into the 2026 season and the Sox haven't had a winning season since 2021. We know when Getz took over (Late August of 2023) so 2024 and 2025 have been full "Getz years" The 2026 season will be his third full year on the job. At what point in the process do we expect the Sox to be actually competitive? 

 

Second half of 2026. I'd prefer sooner, but I don't know if its realistic. If Robert stays and continues looking energized, we see continued growth from the young position players, and Braden Montgomery comes up in the second half and looks like he belongs, then I think the offense is at least a positive. 

Pitching is what I think holds them back. It looks like we have a group of 4th/5th starters and a shaky, inconsistent bullpen. Hagen Smith is likely more than a year away, if he's even a starter. Hopefully Schultz can shove the rest of the year and look good in the fall. That puts him back on track to make his MLB debut next year I'd think. The Sox do have some interesting arms in AA that could get a look next year, too. There are also some interesting high level 2026 SP free agent options (Framber Valdez, Ranger Suarez, Dylan Cease, Zac Gallen) to bring some help to the rotation, assuming the Sox spend anything. Bullpen has some too, but I'm not as interested in spending there.

One area I'm WAY more encouraged than I was in the previous rebuild is overall talent pipeline. Before it was a bunch of top 50/100 prospects and then nothing. Now, there's top 100 talent, but also some interesting guys in the team top 30 plus what looks like an ability to infuse talent via the draft. 🤞 this continues to look good.

Edited August 25 by almagest

[Jake]

I would love to see some clarity from Getz on what he thinks the timeline is but I don't really expect it — and I probably wouldn't want to give that clarity if I was in his position either. I found his comment about potentially adding via free agency in the offseason to be kind of interesting. I'm never going to be too mad if the organization wants to spend money to add some more wins to the win column, but it's honestly not clear to me what to spend money on. You're already overstocked on young infielders — 5 for 4 positions. You have 2 young catchers for 1 spot. In the outfield, you have Tauchman presumably returning to man RF. LouBob presumably returning for CF. And Benintendi is owed $32M over the next 2 seasons and probably isn't playing badly enough for it to make sense to cut bait and eat that money. So there's your 3 outfield spots spoken for and the excess at the other positions (plus Benintendi/Tauchman both moving pretty slow) means you probably don't want to sign up a full-time DH.

Maybe a starting pitcher? Well, let's look at who we expect to be available internally: Shane Smith, Davis Martin, Yoendrys Gomez, Jonathan Cannon, Sean Burke, Mike Vasil, Drew Thorpe, Noah Schultz, Duncan Davitt (via Houser deal), Ky Bush, plus a few guys who are a bit less likely to make the team early in the year but with some lucky breaks could be ready/available by ~June (e.g., the whole 2025 AA rotation). I'm not saying this long list of names is filled with all-stars, but for a rebuilding team you do want to give yourself some chance to give some pitchers some run to see what they've got. Not to mention potential Rule 5 picks, scrap heap pickups, and so on. Big money free agent starting pitchers are very high risk acquisitions and the risk increases over time; seems like a weird place to invest. 

Okay, relievers? Maybe. I could produce a long list of guys who maybe will provide bullpen innings and there's maybe 100 players outside the Sox organization who will be available at low or no cost who have the talent to eat up some MLB innings (not to say that all of them will). But you see what that has looked like this year and it's been a pretty bumpy ride. Throwing a little money at trustworthy veteran relievers wouldn't be crazy IMO. Could make the team more watchable and might give you some flippable pieces. Technically, these signings are risky, but the absolute dollar amounts involved are rarely all that big. 

pre-2027 feels like the soonest plausible offseason for the Sox to start throwing money around, but for all we know there may not even be a MLB season in 2027. FWIW, that also feels like the soonest you could see Getz be fired.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

17 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Watching the Astros dominate the Sox in 2021... it almost felt inevitable as that season was winding down, going on the road (just like 2008 without Quentin.)

2020 was actually more heartbreaking because most believed they had a pretty decent chance to win.  (But the Crochet injury and Keuchel debacle...)

So the Sox never came close to experiencing "unprecedented financial flexibility"...for the front office, that meant Grandal Keuchel Lynn Hendriks Kimbrel Graveman Kelly instead.

But never ever a real superstar like a Machado or Bryce Harper.

 

"Can't afford to waste a year."

Too much B.S. to put it all in the rearview mirror, one that extends all the way back to SportsVision, the White Flag trade and 1994.

It goes back way farther than that .The whole history of the franchise is terrible, so yea, if you dont expect things to go south when the owners literally act like they don't ever belong in 1st place then you have your head up your arse. But that doesnt mean I should refuse to enjoy and not express that enjoyment. This is what being a sports fan is. Sure there's always a logical part of your mind that says bad historical franchise + the odds of even the best franchises in any sport of the seasons not ending in disappointment with a heartbreaking loss arent very good . Again thats what being a fan is .. constant disappointment. So if you want to always be sour about it I'd say you enjoy the pain and we all know how misery loves company. Some of us just choose not to be miserable. That does not mean we are delusional nor do we want to stop those who prefer to wallow in their misery from doing their wallowing. Knock yourselves out. You're the ones with moderator powers doing a lot more damage to this board because you get to say anything you want without repercussion. This isnt true for the ones who speak up on behalf of the non miserable other side. Why is it the darkness always wants to crush the light but they turn it around that the light and hope is at fault ?