Jake

One thing that wouldn't make me mad is if Manny gets a bunch of money as well as an early opt-out from someone else, especially if it's after year 2. I don't want the White Sox to sign him to a deal where they have no option to keep him without bidding against the rest of the league in the event that he continues improving/stays at a very high level over the next couple years.

If we do land one of the big dogs, I'd like to see us kick the tires on Dallas Keuchel to add a little juice to this express rebuild.

Let me say this: Don't interpret the length and dollars until you know the opt-outs. 10/300 with no opt-outs and 10/300 with an opt-out after year 2 would be very different contracts.

https://deadspin.com/jim-bowden-caught-stealing-from-fake-twitter-account-d-1614081824 "Final update: Ralph."

People hate Boylen when he runs too slow of an offense but they also hate Boylen if he opens things up and starts running a bit.

I can live with some unreasonably restrictive definition of ace and I understand that FG is using an even dumber mapping of rotation slots to projections, but it remains dumb. Most teams use 5 starters. When you want to say a player is a 1/2/3/4/5 starter, it should map onto his relative rank on some kind of team — maybe a good one, maybe an average one. Nonetheless, I still think the Kopech projection is a joke on their own terms because for a player with Tommy John and no other injury history, the injury has no import to his ceiling. I see no reason to rule out the reasonable possibility that Kopech becomes one of the best few pitchers around. And I am fairly confident that your average scout does not take the FG approach of converting scouting values to projected average WARs. From 2016 to 2018 and 2015 to 2017, no pitcher averaged 7 fWAR. In the 2014 to 2016 window, only one did and barely (Kershaw, the best pitcher of a generation). The last pitcher besides Kershaw to have a 3-year average of 7 fWAR was Roy Halladay from 2009 to 2011. So I think it's fair to say it's not a useful vocabulary when we can simply say that some guys have hall of fame ceilings (pitcher who will average 7 fWAR in a 3-season or longer timespan) and others merely have ace ceilings (let's say something like FG's #2 starter standard, which means top 5-10 pitchers in the game).

It's hard for me to be super invested in this stuff anymore. The top end of our system is so good, I just don't get that worried and know that the exact ordering is shuffling deck chairs a bit. And I really like the group of guys who are getting snubbed on these lists and am confident some will soon be on these lists. That being said, FG saying Kopech has #3 ceiling is a joke. If a guy who throws 100mph fastballs with elite spin, life, etc., has a plus-plus offspeed pitch, and two other ones that show flashes, and has dominated AAA as a starting pitcher, his ceiling is an ace. Period. The prospect publications basically never say a pitcher has a ceiling as an ace, which basically means most aces were once said to not have a ceiling that high. I can read between the lines when they say a player who is obviously a potential ace is described as a potential #2. Saying Kopech has #3 ceiling is flat out stupid. I also question FG's rating of Cease, particularly because I've seen them talk about how they don't think he is at all likely to make it as a starter. I don't know how dominant and consistent a guy has to be as a starting pitcher to get even the least benefit of the doubt about his likelihood to cut it as a starter.

Hey now, we don't do stuff like that around here

Besides lucking into drafting a superstar or having one decide he just has to play for you, I do think the route taken by Philly (Butler), OKC (George), Toronto (Kawhi), and probably some others not coming to mind is the best one. Trade for one of those players even if he has been giving signals that he doesn't want to sign with you. See if you can win enough that he won't ever want to leave. You might get burned after you unloaded the truck to get a guy who takes off in a year or two, but you have to play these games if you want to win them. The tanking method is going to get less viable over time anyway with the recent lottery odds changes and the likelihood that the NBA takes more measures to disincentivize tanking.

The 8/$250M rumor sticks around partly because of how plausible it is. It's not hard to see how Manny's people could have started the offseason thinking 10/300 or 10/350 and want to wait until the last possible second to come down to 8/$250M. Another potential sticking point is that we have offered a straight up 8/250 but he would only take it with player-friendly opt-outs sprinkled in whereas the Sox want to actually have a chance at realizing the upside of getting him cheap (if he wins MVP next year, we don't want him going out and testing the free agent waters again or else this was all almost wasted investment).

I mean I agree that it has looked like he might have been having some kind of mental health issue, but what I've been trying to figure out is whether that stopped

I'd like to hear more on what has been going on with him.

FWIW, I think limiting the roster to 12 pitchers would help accomplish many of the same goals the 3-batter rule would without directly outlawing rapid-fire pitching changes. It would also incentivize the development of two-way players, albeit with the risk that it promotes more use of position players on the mound who aren't pitchers at all.

Luis Robert is a good one because I think it's fair to say that thus far he hasn't been judged based on his production. That changes this year. As far as Madrigal is concerned, I'll want to see whether he gets any loft and starts being more selective at the plate. If he puts up decent numbres on the basis of near-MiLB-leading groundball rates, I'll still be down on him — similar to when minor league pitchers do a decent job in terms of ERA but with unsustainably low K rates (Danish and Beck come to mind). Otherwise, I try to put most of my attention on the guys who are close to MLB. That means Collins, Burdi, Dunning, Cease, Basabe, probably some others I'm forgetting.

It doesn't make sense that you would agree on years/dollars and then move on to opt-outs/incentives. The latter have a big impact on the former.

Was a decent game to watch and the Bulls looked good against a >.500 team. Markkanen 3 straight 30 point games. Felicio almost as good as your average high school team manager.

The team with the worst record only has a 52% chance of picking in the top 4. Bulls currently have 48% chance of picking in the top 4. Could go down to 42% chance if they catch up to the Hawks, who have 5 more wins.

I don't deny that basketball is very popular at all or really anything that you're saying. I think this is all true despite the NBA having a very poor competitive climate. If there weren't teams with several superstars on them and every team was trying in earnest to be as good as possible, all that you say would remain true and I suspect even more fans would be drawn to the game.

The bright side is that baseball isn't the living nightmare that the NBA is where nobody is paid what they're worth (many are overpaid, though!) and players are randomly shuffled between teams in complicated cap-related moves as nobody gives a shit about anybody but perhaps 5 teams and everyone else is stupid unless they get the #1 pick.

Here's a good review of what the projection systems did last year: http://www.banishedtothepen.com/evaluating-the-2018-predictions-and-projections/ A couple of insights: the best performer (PECOTA) was, on average, off by 7.5 wins. These systems will basically always underestimate the best teams and overestimate the worst teams. This is why for several seasons now it has been overestimating the Sox — especially when you consider that it doesn't bake in the assumption that the worst teams will dump their veteran performers in trades nor does it factor in the best teams adding good players via trade. The article also gives another useful way to think about these projections, which is the way it orders the teams. So the Sox projection was a ways off in terms of wins but basically correct in that we were widely projected to be one of MLB's worst teams.

Fulmer has/had premium stuff. The Sox botched his development enough that if he never makes it, it will be hard to say whether he would have put things together without being rushed to levels he wasn't ready for.

The portion of the warmup that happens on the mound isn't essential for the literal purpose of warming up. It's to get the pitcher accustomed to the mound, catcher, backdrop, etc.

I think it should be to MLB's credit and proof of their seriousness about reducing game time that they're getting behind moves that will reduce the amount of commercial breaks.

I honestly don't think the faking injury thing is much of a problem at all. There are other situations where faking an injury is advantageous and teams don't do it because any scrutiny from the league will get people in trouble.

http://www.tankathon.com/ to look at Bulls draft position possibilities ^^ I'm partial to Ja Morant as far as players go.