Team Breakout Article

[WhiteSox2023]

40 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I did a combo. Got a Ronald Belisario jersey for $20 at a season ticketholder event several years ago. Definitely a legend AND a one off.

Ronald Bellylardio.  A true legend.

Edited 9 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[Dick Allen]

3 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Ronald Bellylardio.  A true legend.

I look way better than him in it. Mine is a road gray.

[southsider2k5]

29 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

How did we perform against our Expected W-L last year and how much of that variance was driven by a poor bullpen?  You claim you want to win games, but the fastest way to radically improve our record with limited investment is probably improving the bullpen.  And don’t get me wrong, I’m generally aligned with your views on bullpen investment, but we’re talking about one or two dudes who make a combined $15M or so.  And one of those guys is intended to be the closer and can be flipped in the likely event we aren’t in the playoff mix come July.

The biggest and easiest gains we can make are the bullpen.  They having been historically bad.  Even just normal bad would be many games.  Granted the rest of the roster is still very lacking.

[soxrwhite]

59 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I like Baldwin a lot too, but I do not like how they have handled him at the major league level.  It’s been very uneven playing time and not consistent at any position, and then they wonder why he looks off in the outfield sometimes.  Let the kid figure it out or the trash will take itself out 

I agree but, in your opinion, what position should be his?

[Chicago White Sox]

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Conforto is not a MLB caliber starter. Hence why no one is going to sign him to start everyday... except maybe the White Sox.

The White Sox aren't rebuilding, they're bad. People should really stop using the word rebuilding to describe BAD baseball teams. 

This is absurd semantics.  Rebuilding is a life cycle term while “good” or “bad” is a performance outcome description.  Most (but not all) rebuilding teams are “bad”, whereas teams in their competitive window can also be “bad” due to injury, luck, or talent regression.  Making this an either or thing is just silly.

[Chicago White Sox]

2 hours ago, Dick Allen said:

If the Mets signed Tucker or Bellinger, they would have DFA'd Acuna.

I think they would have been able to trade him though.

[Baron]

Robert Murray's video from yesterday it didn't sound like even the White Sox were in love with signing Conforto. But they were in on Harrison Bader. 

[Kyyle23]

11 minutes ago, soxrwhite said:

I agree but, in your opinion, what position should be his?

Corner OF.  Iirc he has a pretty good arm so probably right.  He seems to get lost badly in center

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

My daughter got me a signed Robert jersey for Christmas in 21 and it’s on my wall just kinda looking pathetic now 

Yeah, all jerseys & memorabilia from the past rebuild have take a serious hit.  I had a wall of these cool hand drawn prints of Abreu, Moncada, Anderson, & Eloy and outside of Jose I’m embarrassed to rock them at this point.

[WhiteSox2023]

4 minutes ago, Baron said:

Robert Murray's video from yesterday it didn't sound like even the White Sox were in love with signing Conforto. But they were in on Harrison Bader. 

Good, they shouldn’t be.  Bader is one thing.  Conforto should be contemplating retirement.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Plenty of organizations do OK without money, and plenty don't. White Sox problem is they just hired familiarity and not someone who has been exposed to and is capable of putting together a team without much money. JR wasn't going to go down that path again. He did with Himes, and didn't like Larry because Larry wanted JR to stay out of his way. He built a 94 win team with the lowest payroll in baseball and got fired because JR couldn't take credit for any of the acquisitions.

I don’t disagree and will never defend the process behind his hiring, but Getz at least appears to be building an org & strategy around an owner who isn’t going to spend with the big boys or take on the risk of a massive individual contract.  It’s a shame Kenny & Rick never got the memo and instead built their strategy around poor infrastructure and signing B & C tier free agents at less valuable spots like the bullpen, 1B/DH, etc.

[ChiSoxFanMike]

I’m impressed how every thread on this forum ends up in an argument about Chris Getz. 

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

I like Baldwin a lot too, but I do not like how they have handled him at the major league level.  It’s been very uneven playing time and not consistent at any position, and then they wonder why he looks off in the outfield sometimes.  Let the kid figure it out or the trash will take itself out 

That’s why I’d tell him he’s 90% an outfielder next year and will only rotate through the infield in select situations or in the event of key injuries.  Physically he has the talent to be a good defensive outfielder, but he needs to consistent reps to learn how to read the ball off the bat, optimize routes, and make against or off the wall.

[Tnetennba]

17 hours ago, Sleepy Harold said:

The Chicago White Sox: Kings of edging

The Chicago White Sox: An Unending, Colossally Disappointing Tease 

[DoUEvenShift]

7 minutes ago, ChiSoxFanMike said:

I’m impressed how every thread on this forum ends up in an argument about Chris Getz. 

Welcome to SoxTalk!

[WestEddy]

12 minutes ago, ChiSoxFanMike said:

I’m impressed how every thread on this forum ends up in an argument about Chris Getz. 

I can't tell if it's a bunch of dudes on the spectrum who can't let go of an imaginary grudge, an idiot (me) who can't just walk on by and leave it alone, trolls who love to get the idiots going, or all of the above. 

[almagest]

8 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I can't tell if it's a bunch of dudes on the spectrum who can't let go of an imaginary grudge, an idiot (me) who can't just walk on by and leave it alone, trolls who love to get the idiots going, or all of the above. 

All of the above.

[Chicago White Sox]

53 minutes ago, almagest said:

I agree w/ you on most of this, but I'd bet if we looked into the trade results each time it happened, Ray Ray is right that these "sign a guy to flip him" trades rarely if ever work out. The best case is probably the Vargas trade.

That might be true.  However, at a conceptual level, relievers are typically paid on past experience and ones who have consistently performed in high leverage and or have rocked up a lot of saves are compensated far more than their peers.  We are buying a reliever with great but limited high leverage experience and handing him that opportunity.  If I look at someone like Tanner Scott, the Marlins went out and acquired and gave him his first real opportunity at consistent high leverage in year 2.  He responded incredibly well and it increased his value exponentially.  The following year when the team was out of contention, they were able to spin him off for what was considered a haul at the time despite being a rental.

That is the conceptual playbook here.  Get an arm you like and put them in the closer role and hope they perform.  If they do, their value will only go up because a successful inning of high leverage is far more valuable than a medium & low one and valuation models like fWAR reflect this.  How you acquire said player is mostly irrelevant if the price isn’t insane and you truly believe in the arm.

[Chisoxfn]

They still have a long ways to go - but they are not anywhere close to the worst JR franchise / worse franchise in Chicago. Bulls are in such a worse spot. Sox actually feel like they are in the best position in a long time - with a new owner looming (and at this point - I have to assume anything is better) combined with at least what is an improving farm system and development org.  But they are still a ways off and I would like nothing more than see them ink Gio to a 1 and 1 type deal (tradeable asset) and/or someone else.  None of those moves prevent you from getting the 11th pick in the draft (which is best club can do) and I'd also like to see us find ways for the org to acquire some more draft picks / international money in the future. 

But more than anything - combo of a new owner and improving system (combined with a golden opportunity upcoming in this year(s) draft - and Its best I have felt in a long time (even though the major league club will still be very very bad).  

[almagest]

6 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

That might be true.  However, at a conceptual level, relievers are typically paid on past experience and ones who have consistently performed in high leverage and or have rocked up a lot of saves are compensated far more than their peers.  We are buying a reliever with great but limited high leverage experience and handing him that opportunity.  If I look at someone like Tanner Scott, the Marlins went out and acquired and gave him his first real opportunity at consistent high leverage in year 2.  He responded incredibly well and it increased his value exponentially.  The following year when the team was out of contention, they were able to spin him off for what was considered a haul at the time despite being a rental.

That is the conceptual playbook here.  Get an arm you like and put them in the closer role and hope they perform.  If they do, their value will only go up because a successful inning of high leverage is far more valuable than a medium & low one and valuation models like fWAR reflect this.  How you acquire said player is mostly irrelevant if the price isn’t insane and you truly believe in the arm.

I don't think "acquire to flip" and "take a gamble on a guy to upgrade his performance in a bigger role and potentially trade him in a year" are the same. If the Sox can get Dominguez to be a good closer this year and trade him in the offseason or next deadline that might bring some useful pieces.

[Chicago White Sox]

58 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

To start in the big leagues at the beginning of this season? Of course not. In 450 career at bats he's a negative player who has been a butcher defensively. He had an xwOBA of 307 last year while being a liability in the field.

At most he should be playing himself into paying time as a utility player who can cover IF and OF spots. 

I’ll be honest Ray Ray, when you first joined the board you were a detail-oriented, highly analytical poster whose constant use of the word “pal” brought a breath of fresh air.  Now you are so disgruntled about the team that you barely watch the games anymore and now just do lazy “full season” drive-by analysis at every turn.

Brooks was fucking incredible in AAA last year (SSS) with a 89th percentile xwOBA, strong contact & barrel rates, above average power, league average chase,  and high end speed.  When he returned to the Sox after his demotion, he proceeded to put up a 116 wRC+ in nearly 200 plate appearances and nothing about it appears to be flukish.  Yes, he sucked in defensively in the OF corners, but was neutral in CF overall (SSS again).  Both the eye test and advanced metrics show a kid that struggled with reads and route optimization, which shouldn’t be surprising given he was learning on the fly.  However, with his speed and baseball intelligence, there is reason to believe he can improve with time.  Ultimately, not giving a kid who just put up a 116 wRC+ over his 200 PA’s in his rookie season is the definition of insanity and/or poor analysis.  The old Ray Ray would agree with that point too.

[Chicago White Sox]

12 minutes ago, almagest said:

I don't think "acquire to flip" and "take a gamble on a guy to upgrade his performance in a bigger role and potentially trade him in a year" are the same. If the Sox can get Dominguez to be a good closer this year and trade him in the offseason or next deadline that might bring some useful pieces.

The only difference is the size of the bet we are making.  Even if Dominguez has a down season, he can probably be moved without eating material money.  For him to command value, it’s all about performing in the closer role.  If he does, his value will increase and he’ll have a chance to return a nice piece or two.

[southsider2k5]

41 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I can't tell if it's a bunch of dudes on the spectrum who can't let go of an imaginary grudge, an idiot (me) who can't just walk on by and leave it alone, trolls who love to get the idiots going, or all of the above. 

Does that make you the troll or idiot, in this scenario?

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

40 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I’ll be honest Ray Ray, when you first joined the board you were a detail-oriented, highly analytical poster whose constant use of the word “pal” brought a breath of fresh air.  Now you are so disgruntled about the team that you barely watch the games anymore and now just do lazy “full season” drive-by analysis at every turn.

Brooks was fucking incredible in AAA last year (SSS) with a 89th percentile xwOBA, strong contact & barrel rates, above average power, league average chase,  and high end speed.  When he returned to the Sox after his demotion, he proceeded to put up a 116 wRC+ in nearly 200 plate appearances and nothing about it appears to be flukish.  Yes, he sucked in defensively in the OF corners, but was neutral in CF overall (SSS again).  Both the eye test and advanced metrics show a kid that struggled with reads and route optimization, which shouldn’t be surprising given he was learning on the fly.  However, with his speed and baseball intelligence, there is reason to believe he can improve with time.  Ultimately, not giving a kid who just put up a 116 wRC+ over his 200 PA’s in his rookie season is the definition of insanity and/or poor analysis.  The old Ray Ray would agree with that point too.

His 100AB running wxOBA on the last day of the season was 314, which is right at league average. Not bad!

He was a negative defender who hasn't fared well in the outfield so far, as you pointed out.

When I joined the board, fans weren't arguing that players like Brooks Baldwin should be handed a job out of Spring Training. Big league jobs on competitive teams are earned, they're not handed to guys that have proven nothing. 200 Plate appearances? Come on man. I'm still analytical, which is why I'm scoffing at 200 PA's earning a guy a starting nod on a major league team. 

I never ever said to give up on him too. He should have a right to earn a spot on the team. You're handing him a MLB starting outfielders job with all the flaws you, yourself, point to above. This isn't some elite prospect with loud tools. he was the 25th! ranked prospect in the Sox system last year. I just don't agree with handing a player of that ilk a starting job without truly earning it.

Edited 7 hours ago by Look at Ray Ray Run

[almagest]

27 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

The only difference is the size of the bet we are making.  Even if Dominguez has a down season, he can probably be moved without eating material money.  For him to command value, it’s all about performing in the closer role.  If he does, his value will increase and he’ll have a chance to return a nice piece or two.

If he has a down season he's probably not moveable. I assume you mean something like he fails as a closer but is still a solid middle/late inning reliever. In that case I don't know if I want to trade him because those guys probably won't amount to much.