People get on me for being repetitious. What about you? We get it. You are not embarrassed by the pathetic play of your favorite team and want them to lose to get a better phantom draft pick. Why do you have to offend me by posting that fact all the time.

Just.Win.White.Sox.

 

hey greg, I enjoy reading your post, but this time you are wrong. be cool.

 

 

peace

Last year at this time, #3 wouldn't have been enough for Rodon.

 

true and I still believe that 2 factors happen. 1 Rodon agent wanting max money

2 using some of the allotted draft money to sign other drafted players.

 

hoping that someone would do just that, make something as an update or countdown

for the draft pick.

 

Keep those updates coming chili! I'm watching the top 11 draft pick race myself. If the Sox are going to suck while rebuilding then I have no problem with them getting another high pick next June.

 

And for the record and this really isn't directed towards anyone, just saying. I am a Sox fan but that's just it, a fan. By no means does the Sox sucking embarrass me. If the team sucks its due to the players and FO, not the fans so if there's any embarrassment to be felt its the players and FO, not the fans.

People get on me for being repetitious. What about you? We get it. You are not embarrassed by the pathetic play of your favorite team and want them to lose to get a better phantom draft pick. Why do you have to offend me by posting that fact all the time.

Just.Win.White.Sox.

I saved $200 this year by not buying the MLB Extra Innings package for the first time since 2005.

Stone just had some very pointed criticism of the Sox on M&H, and mentioned losing for draft picks. He didnt advocate telling players to blow games, but definitely mentioned that it is for the better when you lose more games down the stretch.

 

Check out the audio from 8AM-8:15AM on the score website

Stone just had some very pointed criticism of the Sox on M&H, and mentioned losing for draft picks. He didnt advocate telling players to blow games, but definitely mentioned that it is for the better when you lose more games down the stretch.

 

Check out the audio from 8AM-8:15AM on the score website

 

It is a balancing act. What I don't want to see if those losses come at the expense of development. For example, if you are the White Sox, and Avi Garcia hits .100 with no power for September, what do you do? Maybe it gets you a better draft pick, but if it comes at the expense of the team's future, that isn't good.

 

I'd much rather see games won because guys like Sanchez, Flowers, Garcia, etc are playing well, than for the kids to go into the tank and us to get a better draft pick. Usually to lose games, you need to have players play losing baseball. If it is just the pen blowing games, fine. Any more than that, and we do more harm than good for the future of this organization. It isn't as simple as Lose Baby Lose!

It is a balancing act. What I don't want to see if those losses come at the expense of development. For example, if you are the White Sox, and Avi Garcia hits .100 with no power for September, what do you do? Maybe it gets you a better draft pick, but if it comes at the expense of the team's future, that isn't good.

 

I'd much rather see games won because guys like Sanchez, Flowers, Garcia, etc are playing well, than for the kids to go into the tank and us to get a better draft pick. Usually to lose games, you need to have players play losing baseball. If it is just the pen blowing games, fine. Any more than that, and we do more harm than good for the future of this organization. It isn't as simple as Lose Baby Lose!

Conveniently, we have a way for both of these to happen known as the bullpen!

When Sale or Rodon are on the mound, I'll hope for a win. But 90 losses should net the Sox a nice pick. 13-19 would be fine with me, although what we root for doesn't make a difference. They'll show up and try to win a game, and whatever the final record is, is.

It is a balancing act. What I don't want to see if those losses come at the expense of development. For example, if you are the White Sox, and Avi Garcia hits .100 with no power for September, what do you do? Maybe it gets you a better draft pick, but if it comes at the expense of the team's future, that isn't good.

 

I'd much rather see games won because guys like Sanchez, Flowers, Garcia, etc are playing well, than for the kids to go into the tank and us to get a better draft pick. Usually to lose games, you need to have players play losing baseball. If it is just the pen blowing games, fine. Any more than that, and we do more harm than good for the future of this organization. It isn't as simple as Lose Baby Lose!

 

For example, on the Sox current 6 game losing streak, all of the RBIs have been from players that have a future with this organization (Abreu, Garcia, Sanchez, Gillaspie, Ramirez). No shame in getting a higher draft pick if these players still continue to perform while Sale, Q stay healthy.

It is a balancing act. What I don't want to see if those losses come at the expense of development. For example, if you are the White Sox, and Avi Garcia hits .100 with no power for September, what do you do? Maybe it gets you a better draft pick, but if it comes at the expense of the team's future, that isn't good.

 

I'd much rather see games won because guys like Sanchez, Flowers, Garcia, etc are playing well, than for the kids to go into the tank and us to get a better draft pick. Usually to lose games, you need to have players play losing baseball. If it is just the pen blowing games, fine. Any more than that, and we do more harm than good for the future of this organization. It isn't as simple as Lose Baby Lose!

Best post ever. In a vaccum, sure, let's get a better pick. But this isn't a vacuum, and our better pick could be the result of important players not playing well.

I've been hoping for 75 wins since Opening Day. I want to be convinced the team improved. I'm not going to root for picks 4 vs. pick 7 -- I hope it's protected in the top ten (11?) but that we did well enough that we are poised for another offseason of improvement at the major league level.

I'd simply like to see the record improved from last year....4 more wins to get to last seasons mark, 32 games to go. Go 9-23 and I'm happy with a 5 game improvement despite this horrid bullpen. With an average pen we're probably looking at a 10+ game improvement (Not 10 to add to the 5, but 10 overall).

 

I think they'll do a bit better than that once Eaton gets back though, and I have 0 problem with that.

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 201411 yr by scs787

It is a balancing act. What I don't want to see if those losses come at the expense of development. For example, if you are the White Sox, and Avi Garcia hits .100 with no power for September, what do you do? Maybe it gets you a better draft pick, but if it comes at the expense of the team's future, that isn't good.

 

I'd much rather see games won because guys like Sanchez, Flowers, Garcia, etc are playing well, than for the kids to go into the tank and us to get a better draft pick. Usually to lose games, you need to have players play losing baseball. If it is just the pen blowing games, fine. Any more than that, and we do more harm than good for the future of this organization. It isn't as simple as Lose Baby Lose!

 

 

 

we had to explain the same thing LAST YEAR to everyone on the board

Players are not going to lose on purpose, and any discussion of that is silly. They don't have to, and they don't care very much about a #5 draft pick vs a #10 pick the next year. The losing takes care of itself. IOW, there are teams either fighting for a playoff spot (or trying to get home field adv) or teams with not much if any hope of getting into post season play. Not much in between. Call it Group 1 and Group 2.

 

Now I don't have any stats to back me up, just decades of watching MLB. When Group 1 above plays Group 2 at the end of the season, there is a huge disparity. If the same teams meet in April-June, not nearly as much. Why? Because in September Group 1 teams are playing much harder and certainly with more emotion than Group 2 teams. This translates to wins and losses.

 

There will always be exceptions. There will often be a Group 1 team go into the tank the last two weeks of the season and a Group 2 team can get hot and be a spoiler. But the Sox are clearly a Group 2 team this year. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Players are not going to lose on purpose, and any discussion of that is silly. They don't have to, and they don't care very much about a #5 draft pick vs a #10 pick the next year. The losing takes care of itself. IOW, there are teams either fighting for a playoff spot (or trying to get home field adv) or teams with not much if any hope of getting into post season play. Not much in between. Call it Group 1 and Group 2.

 

Now I don't have any stats to back me up, just decades of watching MLB. When Group 1 above plays Group 2 at the end of the season, there is a huge disparity. If the same teams meet in April-June, not nearly as much. Why? Because in September Group 1 teams are playing much harder and certainly with more emotion than Group 2 teams. This translates to wins and losses.

 

There will always be exceptions. There will often be a Group 1 team go into the tank the last two weeks of the season and a Group 2 team can get hot and be a spoiler. But the Sox are clearly a Group 2 team this year. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

It would be an interesting study, and I agree with your general premise that teams don't try to lose but rather bad teams lose more often than good teams. There have been other times in this franchise's history where they've performed much better in September and it was concluded during those times that they performed better because the pressure was off. I look to 2002, 2003 (where the opposite happened), 2004, and 2007 off the top of my head.

 

This team most definitely won't tank and try to lose.

Today the Sox gained a game on....

 

Rangers, Rockies, Cubs, and Phillies.

 

Sox are now 8.5 GB of the #1 pick, and 4.5 GB of the #5 pick.

How did the #8 pick in the 2008 draft turn out? The Sox better lose a lot more to get a "guaranteed" good pick.

The Sox better lose a lot more to get a "guaranteed" good pick.

Tank!! Tank!!!!! Tank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tank!! Tank!!!!! Tank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes, playing Tank is a good way to try and lose games.

Conveniently, we have a way for both of these to happen known as the bullpen!

The only problem is, it means the Sox need 6 new bullpen pitchers. That is a tall order in one year.

The only problem is, it means the Sox need 6 new bullpen pitchers. That is a tall order in one year.

 

Eh. That is the fun part about a bullpen. There will be a certain amount of bounce back. You just have to guess correctly who it will be.

 

I have this discussion many yrs ago either on this board or the other sox board.

 

bottom line I really can't fathom a player will be willing to lose on purpose. too much like losing

for money. that and the pride the players have.

 

now the flip side, the problem with a team that is inconsistent like the sox, the lineup or screwing

up a lineup by accident, can have the desire effect.

Edited August 26, 201411 yr by LDF

The only problem is, it means the Sox need 6 new bullpen pitchers. That is a tall order in one year.

 

I'd say right now Putnam, Petricka, and Guerra are all locks. Webb probably sticks around for at least a month or 2. The rest are such a mystery. If the Sox think they can compete, I'm all about trying to sign/trade for a closer, a good LH reliever, and a straight up loogy.

 

Even 3 new additions is a tall order in one year, but I hope it happens.

How did the #8 pick in the 2008 draft turn out? The Sox better lose a lot more to get a "guaranteed" good pick.

Gordon Beckham was a lot better than most #8 picks wind up being.

How did the #8 pick in the 2008 draft turn out?

 

He accumulated more than 10x the amount of career WAR that the #9 pick did.

 

That argument is really silly though. You don't forgo any strategy in the draft simply because a high round pick didn't pan out.