ptatc

Article in the Athletic about Walker Buehler returning to pitching less than 12 months after surgery. This is his second UCL reconstruction. The Sox aren't the only organization to look at this timeline, the dodgers did it.

They may as well try for individual accomplishments, the team is going nowhere.

I wasn't comparing the Sox and Cubs attendance. Just showing that even the Cubs attendance is predicated on winning. Never said the Sox would win next year. Only said that all of the factors you stated really won't change the attendance. Only winning or losing really changes attendance.

It will increase if they win. decrease if they lose. All of the rest of it really doesn't matter in the big picture for attendance. Everyone hated what the the Ricketts did with Marquee and some said they wouldn't go because of politics. They have started winning, attendance is up.

For cash? Now they are spending money!

True, the mortality rate is much lower. However, what the treatments do to the body when preparing for a baseball season is an unknown.

Very true. It didn't start in December. Also, there aren't many rehab protocols for a pitcher recovering from oncology treatment who has a 4 year history of a partially torn UCL.

I disagree. In the clubhouses I've been in the GMs ways had a spy (Boston) and they knew exactly what was happening. In today's game the GMs have even more influence.

The real question is has he been allowed to do what he wants with the team and rules. Like every other aspect we discussed here, no one makes the decisions in isolation.

The financial approach will never change. JR is set on staying under the luxury tax. He doesn't like the league of "he who has the most money wins." He's repeatedly said that is the issue with baseball. No competitive, cost controlled balance.

This makes sense. All the other stuff around it will be the interesting part.

What's there to spin. Player wanted to leave early. FO said no. Player complained and another player took offense to the complaining of wanting to leave team. All was handled in house until someone leaked it to the media.

He's not wrong here though. Probably a better way to confront Grandal though.

Sounds like they've gone too far the other way.

I agree. But they need to come up with the rules then. Do they outlaw facial hair and have a strict dress code? Does everyone have the exact same drills and stretching requirements or is it individualized?

I agree. Its where you draw the line that is difficult to figure out. It's somewhere between Not having facial hair and not sleeping in the pen. But again if they were winning no one would care. So what level of the rules make a winning team?

This is a good point. How much is personal development and how much is situational development. I could see the Sox philosophy in the low minors but you would think by the time they hit AA, that should start to change.

He's right. No one was complaining about his 2 years ago when they one 90 games. Does not having facial hair make you a better player? Or do all players need to be accountable for themselves? Or is it somewhere in the middle? I know in higher education this is a significant struggle right now. Are they adults or do we treat them like Kindergarten and have rules for everything.

Looking at the ACL stats, I see Krogman as a LHP. Wasn't there an OF that was Krogman. Did he switch to pitching?

A short time ago everyone loved his attitude he brought to the game.

I stand corrected. I missed all of the posts praising the FO anf their work.

To each his own.

Yes. But for different reasons. I think they had a good plan with the rebuild. Acquired talented players and the the plan started out promising with playoff appearances and 90 win seasons. The reason these past 2 seasons are so hard is that everyone including most experts thought they were young and talented and ready to start a good run. Then for whatever reason it fell apart. Not sure what they could have done different but they are responsible for everything in the end so it's time to go. You don't seem to want to give them positive credit for anything.

You are correct that we will agree to disagree. You are making far too many biased assumptions for my liking

Can't argue the point other than that since they are here, they need to make the decisions.