shakes

I don't disagree with much of what you've said. The ball is harder, but there are many other contributing factors to that - pitchers are throwing harder, hitters are stronger and are optimizing their power and selling out to hit it harder. Also, my question is what should the game do to increase pace and attention to a younger fanbase that is declining? I've been watching baseball my whole life and I no doubt am finding it harder to watch. I think they are trying ideas, if not pitching change limitations and eliminating shifts, what else? That's one example and agree it can be over officiated, but the NBA has made a lot of changes that have been viewed positively. What should baseball be doing to make the game more interesting as it evolves?

I'm a little torn on this. The game is getting boring to watch and they need to figure out ways to keep interest with younger generations. Not just on TV, but in person. I'm surprised too that everyone is saying hitters should adjust. If you limit shifting, can't pitchers adjust to pitch to hitters weaknesses? Hitters have been working on their strengths their whole lives, you can't just up and change your approach when pitchers are now throwing harder(and nastier) and specializing more to pitch into the shift. The whole just bunt and hit the other way argument is frankly a weak one and screams "get off my lawn". Pitching/defense is at an advantage in this day. I'm by no means against the shift as it's smart baseball, but it is boring. If not ban shifts, what can be done to make the game pace better and become a little more fun to watch? I like defensive play - but I want to see defenders make plays - not line up better for easier plays. Other sports leagues have made elements of defense illegal and made the game more exciting. What can baseball do?

Fully agree. I've had some rough stretches in my younger days, and have completely turned my life and career around because people were willing to give me second chances, and I've made them work. And you know what, it's sports. I'm a fan of Chicago sports teams and we lose WAY too much. I will put some of my ethics and fake outrage aside and say he is the best candidate and can close a big hole with this team. If they win with him, it won't matter. I think Pats, Red Sox, and Yankees fans have a lot more fun watching their teams win most years and don't care what the national media/fans say about their scandals. Anyway, nobody cares about the White Sox outside of Chicago, so why should we care what they think? Hinch is going to get hired. Would you rather he goes to Detroit and builds a rival back up into a contender and hold your moral high ground? Nope, I'm tired of disappointment. Let's win!

My company gives ten weeks paid Paternity leave, which is longer than the current season. We also have paid family medical leave, and short term and long term paid disability leave. I don't even have to give my boss or employees a single detail. Mental health issues are covered, and a year is quite common. Also, feel free to perfect an in demand skill that only a handful of people in the world can do, And see what kind of options you have.

I thought it was good discipline by Hahn. Shop around to see if there is a way to improve for now, but don't give away something you'll regret. Too many unknown variables this year. Use the off-season to improve. A FA starter is so much more attractive, when it means keeping and developing young depth. Cease, Dunning, Kopech, Lopez fighting for two spots next year is a great scenario. All need more time in their own way before they are inserted into the top half of a contending rotation.

Every trade is different. It's absolutely reasonable a trade was agreed upon a day ago and not announced. Happens all the time.

Likely true, but I just have doubts they'll spend big in those areas and I like the idea of having good catchers help the staff along. The Sox have money to spend, and only have a couple of needs, and don't like big long contracts. I also have no idea what the market will look like, so maybe this is a good year to shop elsewhere.

Unless the Sox are willing to spend big on a Frontline SP or OF, If 3/30 is an option, then sign him up. Having him and Grandal together will likely increase their effectiveness for the duration of their contracts. They are both good enough to get at bats at DH and Eloy will stay in left for a couple of years. Vaughn, Abreu, backup C will cover DH.

Yeah, with hindsight to boot. And Madrigal went 4 with some wondering if he'd get there. You pick him at 4 or you don't get him. That's the reality. Altuve scratched and clawed to get a FA tryout, if anyone thought Merrifield would be what he is today, he's a top ten pick, Pedroia made it to #65 because people thought his performance outpaced his tools. Madrigal was drafted higher than all these guys because his only tool to develop is power. I hope he's in range as any of these players careers, if he is it is a great pick. There will likely be players picked after him with good or even better careers, but you only get a shot at one of them in the first.

Point is, it's easy to draft all-star players in later rounds- teams just haven't thought of doing it.

He has 83 at bats in low A- with 2hr's, and is likely a 3b. I get for some people upside is based around power, but statements like this are exactly what I was referencing - laugh in our faces? Prospect hyperbole is my favorite.

Thanks for posting this. This is the hardest part I'm having with people complaining about Madrigal. Some seem to think the #4 pick is a slam dunk superstar, and that is just not the case. He's a unique hitter, but I also don't get why elite defense and baserrunning don't get valued. And there is a long way to go here before we know what he is. Reminds me a bit of some of the early discussions about limited upside on TA, as a hitter - some thought he couldn't hit for any power, and nobody thought he would be a batting champ.

People want Ozzie back in today's climate? I've read it all now. Ozzie will always hold a place in Sox history for 2005, but wow have people forgot about his flaws quickly. He's not managing anymore for MANY reasons.

Thanks for the update. Assumed it would be delayed, but wanted to make sure I didn't miss it

We have a bingo. Keep them all. Sign FA relievers. McCann and EE could be gone next year or this team could be in it and need to add at the deadline. I like the depth and I think McCann is a great backup who has proven can handle being a starting catcher if needed.

That list hurts my soul.

? I have been as critical of this FO as anyone, but this new complaint about blocking future prospects by spending money on good players is baffling. Building up your assets by spending money you have, and have been hoarding, is exactly what they should be doing. They are building a team with depth for the first time I can remember. They are preserving their core, while allowing more time for development, and even making players earn it through competition. They are using veteran's to safeguard against the best case scenario. Just because these are foreign concepts to Sox fans doesn't make them wrong. Having too many options and potentially too many good players will always work itself out.

I'm not sure any have to go. This builds depth and options for once. If things go the Sox way a lot of teams will be looking for catching and you can maybe move Collins or McCann. If the Sox are falling short, EE and McCann can be dealt. If Collins is on the roster he is learning from some good vets. They can show patience and find at bats even if it's in AAA for Collins. Too many options is good, even if rare for the Sox.

That will require heavy changes through the org. It's needed, but a different topic. Just like FA is needed, trades will be required too. So not giving up any more worthwhile assets this year to keep a 4-5 year window open is a win for now. I like how they are positioned to compete now and in the near future. You just never know when the next Verlander type will come available through trade, so keep positioned to be involved when it does.

And if there is any sustained success, at some point one of the big name young players/prospects will be dealt to fill a need. Vaughn may be that guy. I agree just keep getting good players. That's why I'm excited by the DK signing. Spend money and don't give up assets now. For anyone who thinks this was an overpay, it's not. This is what paying market value looks like. If this contract hurts future success a lot of other things went wrong.

Remove Robert, and they sent what some think is the likeliest prospect to replace him to the Rangers. Doesn't help their odds. None of the OF prospects should be penciled into RF in two years. That's a bad plan.

That may be, but I think he has the type of profile you can wait out a bit. And I'm not big on any of our OF prospects after Robert, but I just don't like giving up an asset when there were easier ways to fill RF. If it was for a pitcher with upside, great.

I do think he has some upside. The problem is he's here for two years- good or bad- and they traded one of his potential replacements for him. An asset they can no longer use in the future to aquire pitching, when there are a number of options that could've given you Mazara's production that only cost money. And money is the one thing they have going for them, they haven't stopped telling us about it. For all the hand wringing about how we couldn't sign players with a second round draft pick attached to the them....well, we just traded a second round pick. The approach of the acquisition is more disappointing than the player

Happ/Frazier

I would've been all in on this approach, but they would need to shift their focus and invest heavily on scouting and analytics, as well as completely revamping player development. It would take years, and they would have to stop hiring company men to lifetime contracts and give up the reigns completely to someone external. I just don't see it happening.