ptatc

It would.

Fair point. I look at it the other way. With the variation in pitching it needs to be built first. Pitching wins the at bat more ofter than the hitter. Start with the pitching/defense, then build offense.

I disagree. It's still pitching that will get you to the promise land. You can focus on regular season. I'll focus on post season. They obviously need to improve both but like the oline in football, start with the foundation.

No. It's just click bait. There aren't people who will buy teams and spend the team into the red every year.

What incentive does an owner have to spend 250 million on a payroll, pay luxury taxes, maybe lose draft picks and still not stillnot be able to compete with the top 2-3 revenue teams?

Nope. He is focusing on pitching because it is what is needed to win in the playoffs and the Sox have no TOR pitcher. Also other than a couple of no name social media posts has there been any reliable information that he is focusing on pitching?

Austin mock has fantastic prediction models if you like gambling.

I would agree and would doubt that is his intention either. I think the reports we've heard is he is focusing on pitching. If the number one prospects they get in the trade is not as good as the ones theyve acquired it would be gross negligence.

It's not just the wealth of the ownership, it's the revenues that are generated being drastically different as well.

There is such such thing as an unhealthy obsession with pitching in baseball. Just look at the injury rates.

But from a single source? Or multiple pitching coaches? The media tends to run with a story.

Just because one person said there is a flaw doesn't mean there is. With the varied philosophies of mechanics there are probably 19 others who would disagree with said flaw.

No one who buys the brewers is going to spend at the level of the dodgers. The team would be insolvent in a couple of years. The revenues are just too far apart.

1 season is way more recent?

He's very reliant on what happened last year in all discussions. Things that happened before don't count and White Sox players will not improve over last year regardless of their past performance.

I agree with all the comments. They need the best package. My comments were more for the ones saying they need to focus on hitting.

While correct in theory, realistically neither side would agree to one without the other. Not that they can agree on either right now. The revenues are so disparate that they will need to do that or have a greater amount of revenue sharing if the league wants anything close to parity. But it's baseball and they've never really had it.

I'm not sure teams mas can even have too much mediocre pitching with the pitching in the league now. But the point is valid. They need to have at least one TOR prospects in the deal.

Welcome to JR prediction. This is what he ways warned about.

Do any of those come to the level of Montgomery, Ramos or even Vera's? They need both but as far as prospect ranking the Sox are sitting better with hitting than pitching. And pitching wins in the playoffs.

How will they get legit pitching if they don't get in this deal? Acquiring pitching is looking really expensive with long term deals. This also comes with a higher injury and bust rate.

The teams with the most money getting all the advantages. 2/3 of the teams just don't have the resources to compete for the best players. Eventually the sport will need a salary cap if they truly want teams to have a shot at the best players. It will be tough to get the union to agree. They love what this will do for salaries. The issue is that we know just having a few great players doesn't make a baseball or equate to winning the world series. Baseball playoffs are so random that any team can win it if they make the playoffs. The teams with the most resources always have the greater odds of making the playoffs.

Don't think they've done that to a player not on the team since Albert Belle.

I agree. It serves no purpose so stop the managers. It doesn't happen often but who knows if someone starts it as a "competitive advantage"

Depends on the size of the gamble. Need to see the contract.