SoxMachine Article on Chris Getz's Vision

[WestEddy]

This is probably the deepest dive I've read on how Chris Getz has revamped the organization with an analysis of the various foci. 

What is Chris Getz's vision for the White Sox? - Sox Machine

Edited 23 hours ago by WestEddy

[The CashMan]

Looks like someone was paid by the word.

[The Mighty Mite]

I would love to know how Ishbia feels about Getz. Would he keep Getz and company on board if he became owner much earlier than expected. My guess is that if the Sox show some real improvement here in 2026, Getz would stay around in an Ishbia regime.

[fathom]

32 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

I would love to know how Ishbia feels about Getz. Would he keep Getz and company on board if he became owner much earlier than expected. My guess is that if the Sox show some real improvement here in 2026, Getz would stay around in an Ishbia regime.

Well, if Jerry sticks around another 9 years like he wants to….

[WestEddy]

17 minutes ago, fathom said:

Well, if Jerry sticks around another 9 years like he wants to….

Doesn't Ish get the prerogative to purchase after 2029? I could see him buying, allowing JR to stay on as a part of the ownership group until passing, just in case they win another in JR's lifetime. 

[Sleepy Harold]

6 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Doesn't Ish get the prerogative to purchase after 2029? I could see him buying, allowing JR to stay on as a part of the ownership group until passing, just in case they win another in JR's lifetime. 

Jerry can "choose to sell" to Ishbia starting in 2029. I believe the first time Ishbia is able to buy the team would be 2034. 

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, The CashMan said:

Looks like someone was paid by the word.

And the rub.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Takeaways.

1. People who Getz hired and gave expanded roles and opportunities too, like him and believe in him. Very surprising!

2. The Sox still haven't expanded their department head counts.

3. Autonomy and freedom are what Getz is selling new leaders. (I'm a fan of this) resources aren't comparable to other markets. 

4. Getz would compare the Sox to the Rays or Guardians. Lots of roster churn. Pretty s%*# fan experience but again, still very limited department size.

5. The proofs of concept or wins cited were someone else's 1st round pick being good, a pitcher being claimed and converted into something viable (something Sox have done a few times over last decade+), and two guys who have never played in the MLB. Anecdotal was polite.

[kitekrazy]

On 2/28/2026 at 10:11 AM, The Mighty Mite said:

I would love to know how Ishbia feels about Getz. Would he keep Getz and company on board if he became owner much earlier than expected. My guess is that if the Sox show some real improvement here in 2026, Getz would stay around in an Ishbia regime.

What is real improvement?  Not losing 100 games?  We aim low.

I think he has brought the organization up to current standards with the rest of the league.  

It's hard to ignore the Marlins GM brought that team close to .500 in his second year.

Maybe the way this organization as is we might be looking at 2030 if they keep going the cheapass route.  That's really not on Getz 

[kitekrazy]

On 2/28/2026 at 11:06 AM, Sleepy Harold said:

Jerry can "choose to sell" to Ishbia starting in 2029. I believe the first time Ishbia is able to buy the team would be 2034. 

how many of us will live than long?  Somehow I think Reinsdorf will.

[WestEddy]

34 minutes ago, kitekrazy said:

What is real improvement?  Not losing 100 games?  We aim low.

I think he has brought the organization up to current standards with the rest of the league.  

It's hard to ignore the Marlins GM brought that team close to .500 in his second year.

Maybe the way this organization as is we might be looking at 2030 if they keep going the cheapass route.  That's really not on Getz 

Bendix? or Kim Ng? Nim Ng took over a playoff team, then lost 90 games twice before squeaking into the playoffs, again in 2023. Peter Bendix took over a playoff team, then lost 100 in the first of two losing seasons. Surely you didn't think the White Sox team coming out of the debacle of a 2023 season were sitting on the precipice of glory. 

Bringing a playoff team down to 100 losses, then finishing 4 games under .500 seems like an incredibly low bar to be aiming for. 

[The Mighty Mite]

14 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

What is real improvement?  Not losing 100 games?  We aim low.

I think he has brought the organization up to current standards with the rest of the league.  

It's hard to ignore the Marlins GM brought that team close to .500 in his second year.

Maybe the way this organization as is we might be looking at 2030 if they keep going the cheapass route.  That's really not on Getz 

The Pythagorean for the 2025 Sox was 71-91, there’s a chance the 2026 Sox come close to 80 wins, I think 75 wins is about right but I really think we got a nucleus of guys who really think they can win, they just might really surprise everybody this year.

Edited yesterday at 12:55 PM by The Mighty Mite

[kitekrazy]

Being the largest market in a small market division and acting like the smallest market in a small market division has become a curse for fans.

We do our best to overhype eveything.

[T R U]

2 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said:

The Pythagorean for the 2025 Sox was 71-91, there’s a chance the 2026 Sox come close to 80 wins, I think 75 wins is about right but I really think we got a nucleus of guys who really think they can win, they just might really surprise everybody this year.

I don't put much stock into pythagorean records. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is what bad teams do. This is just saying "Hey, then only won 60 games but if they weren't such a bad team they could have won 71". Well, they were a bad team.

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, T R U said:

I don't put much stock into pythagorean records. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is what bad teams do. This is just saying "Hey, then only won 60 games but if they weren't such a bad team they could have won 71". Well, they were a bad team.

Isn't Pythagorean based on raw run totals? Like, if they tee off in some key games, that doesn't exactly translate to overturning those one-run losses, or even being able to put up offense against pitchers from the pitching side of the roster. That said, I think a big part of the problem was staring us right in the face - the bullpen. 

[kitekrazy]

 Oh well on the bright side we will get to see a lot of young players and an inexperienced manager.  We underestimate the learning curve in MLN and think it is like the NFL or NBA.

 We will be pronouncing a bad trade, a bust, signing ,nor big league material soon enough.  It's our nature.

The nice difference is the team will be more watchable. Will wins and losses be more important than watching players develop?

 

[T R U]

2 hours ago, WestEddy said:

Isn't Pythagorean based on raw run totals? Like, if they tee off in some key games, that doesn't exactly translate to overturning those one-run losses, or even being able to put up offense against pitchers from the pitching side of the roster. That said, I think a big part of the problem was staring us right in the face - the bullpen. 

That's pretty much why I don't put much stock into it. Its using runs scored and runs allowed to determine an expected winning percentage. It supposed to show how many games a team should have won, but like you said if we win 1 game 12-0 and then lose 5 games in a row that were all 1 score because our bullpen sucks that doesn't exactly mean we are better than what our final record showed. We lost those games because we were bad. 

[southsider2k5]

18 minutes ago, T R U said:

That's pretty much why I don't put much stock into it. Its using runs scored and runs allowed to determine an expected winning percentage. It supposed to show how many games a team should have won, but like you said if we win 1 game 12-0 and then lose 5 games in a row that were all 1 score because our bullpen sucks that doesn't exactly mean we are better than what our final record showed. We lost those games because we were bad. 

This right here.

It treats the final expectations from 5-1, 5-4, 5-4, 5-4, 5-4 the same as it would 12-0, 4-5, 3-4, 3-4, 3-4

[WestEddy]

28 minutes ago, T R U said:

That's pretty much why I don't put much stock into it. Its using runs scored and runs allowed to determine an expected winning percentage. It supposed to show how many games a team should have won, but like you said if we win 1 game 12-0 and then lose 5 games in a row that were all 1 score because our bullpen sucks that doesn't exactly mean we are better than what our final record showed. We lost those games because we were bad. 

No, Pythagorean isn't exact. It's not like the 2025 White Sox were cheated out of 11 wins. Conversely, every run outburst didn't come on the back of a utility infielder pitching. Run differential does have its uses. Labeling a team as "bad" is pretty broad. Why were they "bad"? Every player didn't suck to a man. They put up runs; the bullpen couldn't hold leads. The run differential and Pythagorean starts the discussion that every part of the team wasn't "bad", there were just areas that needed shoring up. With a better bullpen, with better early season subs for injured players, maybe they make up those dozen wins. 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

4 hours ago, WestEddy said:

Isn't Pythagorean based on raw run totals? Like, if they tee off in some key games, that doesn't exactly translate to overturning those one-run losses, or even being able to put up offense against pitchers from the pitching side of the roster. That said, I think a big part of the problem was staring us right in the face - the bullpen. 

It's based on run differential so you can't get the Pythagorean win total till after the season is over. 

They had a lot of close losses and hit a lot better in the 2nd half. 

So, like any team filtering in young talent slowly you get variances in run production and runs allowed. 

We can see where they were weak. Overall it was a lot of late inning losses or the high leverage relief pitching was bad .The starting was less than mediocre.

1st half of the season the offense wasn't scoring enough .  The 2nd half ( which is not a totally accurate term) the hitting was much improved due to some young hitters finding their way. 

So in theory you get better relief pitching and continue what happened with the hitting, then those theoretical wins become real wins . 

I think its fairly evident that there's been more effort to get more late inning wins and improve the record in 1 and 2 run losses. 

Getz wants to establish more wins every year, hopefully by 10 or more each season as they work in more of the top pitching prospects and create enough depth among the hitting prospects to end up with an over .500 team in year or 2. How far above .500 is based on how fast those prospects become consisently good.

2025 was a very good year for Sox rookies and the organization. They now need to show it was real. And the depth has to keep getting better. 

The Sox should get more high quality talent in the 2026 draft. 

There will always be those who quibble about organization wins now because this is all pretty new and as much as I'd like to think getting Shane Smith and Mike Vasil in the Rule 5 may have been about the best you can hope for, you dont really know until a few years after. But traditionally it's not been a fruitful way to help very much.

But it's great that they can take advantage of the bad records and upgrades in scouting and R&D to identify and develop guys like that in such a short period of time. Shane Smith, in particular, would be akin to watching a top pitching prospect develop in the Sox system for 3 or 4 years but it happened in less than a year after the Rule 5 draft. 

Edited 17 hours ago by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

3 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

 Oh well on the bright side we will get to see a lot of young players and an inexperienced manager.  We underestimate the learning curve in MLN and think it is like the NFL or NBA.

 We will be pronouncing a bad trade, a bust, signing ,nor big league material soon enough.  It's our nature.

The nice difference is the team will be more watchable. Will wins and losses be more important than watching players develop?

 

I think a nice progression of wins from year to year because of player development is the goal of any rebuild ,right ? 

2025 was the 1st year after rock bottom. It has to happen again and again and again. Its not crazy  to think it will consudering the talent in the pipeline and the talent yet to be drafted in the most important draft ever for the new front office and staff. 

Think about this. The most important international Latin American  free agent market year still might not be for a few more years. It takes time to become players for the most high profile younger talent . Rome wasnt built in a day. Could take 4-7 years to turn a 16 yr old into a Major Leaguer. 

Wether or not Getz is around for new ownership isn't what the vision is about. It's about building a foundation that you can build upon and expand to sustain a talent pipeline. Then even in years where you don't have high draft choices you can still identify and develop talent. 

[T R U]

56 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

No, Pythagorean isn't exact. It's not like the 2025 White Sox were cheated out of 11 wins. Conversely, every run outburst didn't come on the back of a utility infielder pitching. Run differential does have its uses. Labeling a team as "bad" is pretty broad. Why were they "bad"? Every player didn't suck to a man. They put up runs; the bullpen couldn't hold leads. The run differential and Pythagorean starts the discussion that every part of the team wasn't "bad", there were just areas that needed shoring up. With a better bullpen, with better early season subs for injured players, maybe they make up those dozen wins. 

27th in runs scored, 20th in ERA, 20th in ER allowed, 28th in Field %, 27th in Errors. They were pretty much near the bottom for everything outside of pitching which they were right at bottom 1/3 cutoff. This is why they were "bad".

 I fully expect to see all those trend up this season though, maybe not pitching, but all other areas.

[southsider2k5]

18 minutes ago, T R U said:

27th in runs scored, 20th in ERA, 20th in ER allowed, 28th in Field %, 27th in Errors. They were pretty much near the bottom for everything outside of pitching which they were right at bottom 1/3 cutoff. This is why they were "bad".

 I fully expect to see all those trend up this season though, maybe not pitching, but all other areas.

Yeah, this.  I mean it seems obvious to understand the flaws in a simplistic stat when you apply it to the actual team playing the games.  Teams with historically awful bullpens underperforming pythag seems obvious to me.  Teams making lots of errors also seems obvious.  It's an easy way to turn a close game into a loss.  Again, I think improvement should happen this year, but there this team still has more holes than an aerated golf course.  It's trending, but as a whole, there is still a pretty ugly talent gap between where the Sox are, and where they need to be to be respectable.  The most important things for this team going forward are still mostly in the minors, a few maybe even in college or high school.

[kitekrazy]

2 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

I think a nice progression of wins from year to year because of player development is the goal of any rebuild ,right ? 

2025 was the 1st year after rock bottom. It has to happen again and again and again. Its not crazy  to think it will consudering the talent in the pipeline and the talent yet to be drafted in the most important draft ever for the new front office and staff. 

Think about this. The most important international Latin American  free agent market year still might not be for a few more years. It takes time to become players for the most high profile younger talent . Rome wasnt built in a day. Could take 4-7 years to turn a 16 yr old into a Major Leaguer. 

Wether or not Getz is around for new ownership isn't what the vision is about. It's about building a foundation that you can build upon and expand to sustain a talent pipeline. Then even in years where you don't have high draft choices you can still identify and develop talent. 

This is very difficult in baseball and so few are good at it.

This was all over 10 years too late in this organization.   

I just don't want them to be like the Brewers and trade away because of salary and be confident of the replacements.   Even the best organizations hit and miss.  When the miss is in the postseason for not spending even that will dwindle interest. The Brewers and once the Rays were really good for 162 but that's it. 

[Jake]

FWIW, the Sox underperformed their BaseRuns record by 7 wins as well. Both of these are reasonably good ways of removing luck from your results. Teams rarely show any repeatable ability to win close games, etc. I think it's more than fair to say that last year's team was better than its record suggests. More likely than not, they will play closer to whatever their record ends up being this year. Part of that means they could stay about the same and win 70 games. FWIW, bad bullpen is already accounted for in pythagorean and related statistics *unless* you pre-suppose that the Sox used their worst pitchers at the most important times, which I don't think was the case. I recall some very bad luck with their best relievers on the mound...Grant Taylor suffered from some serious seeing-eye singles in a few key moments, for instance.