RagahRagah

And shit like this is case in point. If I talk about apples and you immediately ignore it and start talking about oranges... Christ, this is grade school stuff.

Yet you just did. Again.

Some things are more likely than others and can be quantified/have higher probabilities. What a concept. Strange position on a forum full of people who love to crunch numbers. Selective thinking, I guess. For instance, a few of those points, such as what he said about Hendriks (that said, Colome was great last year so that needle is not likely to change much this year) and LaRussa being a better manager than Ricky, I'd say are pretty safe bets and I fully grant those. I thought I was too stupid to argue with? You've said that to me about 5 times now. Might wanna pick a street, buddy. I'm a little tired of you insulting me and running away when arguments are presented that you apparently can't counter and then picking the ones you think you can and attempt a serious argument only then (which you eventually run away from anyway). It makes you look silly. Either consistently attempt intelligent posting or consistently make an ass of yourself on purpose. If you have nothing to respond with then maybe just don't respond at all instead of throwing a sucker punch out of bitterness and then running away. Kid stuff. I'm here for sensible and reasonable discussion (notice how consistent I am with responding and taking arguments seriously?), not to play games.

At least 7 of the points you made are 100% speculation. Not to mention you completely ignored the actual point that was made (AGAIN). I rest my case.

We don't have a DH yet and Vaughn has never even seen AAA pitching. You can't say anything about him for certain no matter how much you want to. Hendriks is awesome but our closer was fine last year so we aren't likely adding any more wins to the column in that category. I'm a big fan of Madrigal and Crochet so we are in agreement there. Much as I hate the TLR hire I do expect him to be a much better in game manager so admittedly that might be a factor. But you and others reflecting the subject and not being able to just admit it (it's OK to be frustrated that ownership didn't grab the division by the balls and at least solidify the rotation) is the whole problem here. No amount of points you make to argue around that will change it.

I think how Robert fares this year will make or break how good this lineup will be.

It is so beyond exhausting and irritating that this apparently needs to be repeated over and over again. Some people just have blinders on and can't even entertain the idea that there are still a lot of potential issues. There seemingly is very little room with said fans for identifying, let alone discussing actual analytics that show real concern. Mainly the fact we overall still look like the same team as last year and ultimately that team failed, in a truncated season where there were numerous extra playoff spots. The biggest advantage they will have is a less competitive AL central. But surely those of you super optimistic fans know damn well you wouldn't be happy with merely winning a non competitive division, right?

So basically the same. I never said anything about 85 wins +. I think that is doable. But not necessarily a given. I admit I jumped the gun a but. I do admit that. I do still think the Yankees look better. Will he glad if I'm wrong. But I do admit I was a bit too harsh; as I alluded to, I believe the overall stigma of the Yankees versus the overall stigma of the White Sox (which involves a robust amount of elements) makes it very difficult to be optimistic. So now let's see someone else step up and correct themselves on "shit takes," which there are plenty of and I believe I make very few of.

For both. I know it might sound crazy but it absolutely is a thing. More to my point was the Yankees have been good even in years where they were lacking things, even last year. To be fair, a decent amount of that may be on the org and coaching in general as well. Also, a better offense does compensate some for a little less pitching. How many starters did they have last year?

I'm saying that there is a stigma and that stigma absolutely affects things, at least from a psychological standpoint. Granted, Yankees rotation probably looked better last year but IIRC not vastly so and they did what the Yankees always do. That said, they will have a bit stiffer competition in the East and we will have less so we'll have to wait to see how my reasoning stacks up. I still see them as having a more consistent lineup.

I guess I have to admit this. Problem is it's another "what if" and there are a lot of them swirling around this upcoming season. I don't feel like the Yankees have that to worry about as much. Maybe I'm wrong.

A team that makes the playoffs every year and a team that virtually never makes the playoffs. And the Yankees have a considerably better lineup and had a better playoff showing last year still. Um, I disagree.

The Yankees have been a dominant team for... pretty much ever. And make the playoffs virtually every year, including last year. (And frankly a better lineup than the Sox) I think you're missing just a few things here.

Why on earth do you believe the White Sox and the Yankees (who are still pretty dominant year after year and reach the playoffs virtually all of them) are a remotely sound comparison???

True but as has been said several times, numerous players are also due for regression. The most likely scenario is we are about as good as we were last year. I think another factor will be the managing.

No, but tension can still arise easily. And I believe we have some bold personalities.

How do you not see it that way? We legitimately only had two consistently good starters last year. The only addition this year was Lynn. Everyone else is a wildcard. What is it you aren't seeing?

All this hilarious overhype to a team that basically just made it so they now have a 3 man rotation instead of a 2 man rotation. That's effectively all the Sox did this offseason. And they didn't even win their division in a truncated season before that. Some of you guys are starting to make us look like a Cubs forum with all this delusion. 105 wins. L. M. A. O.

This is such an absurd post. The Padres just had an offseason where they went all out in an effort to beat the big dogs of the MLB. We made a couple of tweaks that don't even make it seem like a sure thing we can even win our division. Come on, man!

I'm sorry but as much as I'm glad he and others are trying, I have a bad feeling this is going to end up being a mess.

I was gonna do it but figured for sure someone else would would have one up by the time I finished, lol.

*Too Stop the act. It's old and transparent. The more you say this the more obvious it is you just can't handle the argument in the first place. Only reason to respond with garbage like this is to be an asshole. You're weak. (And what I'm saying is pretty well established, anyway)

Ownership has clearly shown that winning is not the main priority. (And the truth is our rotation might be a big crapshoot all the way this year; that is not trivial) So the question is who are you referring to when you say "we?"

I think most of the scepticism and nervousness is based on the fact that if we don't do it this year, we are gonna have a whole lot of problems in the starting pitching department as-is going forward.

No, not that. I'm mainly focused on the idea that we are "probably going to win the world series" this year.