Balta1701

No because since the time we were featured in Sports Illustrated we have been careful about paywalled stuff.

Honestly, kinda. If there’s one thing I’ve thought has been missing from this organization for 15 years, from the GMs on down; it’s been professionalism. That doesn’t mean you can’t have fun, but that means you respect your colleagues, you put in your work, you know the guy next to you is doing his best. It’s a billion dollar business, maybe treating it like that. From the White Sox, we always get these childish tantrums. This sounds like me when I was 8 years old and not wanting to go to bed. “Balta come on it’s 8:30” “waaaa no it’s not over”. This is how the manager handles his business and you expect me to spend extra time doing fielding drills? To study a scouting report in detail?

Not only do I really not believe this, I also find it fascinating that the White Sox hitters all seem to have consistently gotten worse at this over the past 3 years.

Their hitting coach has them doing push-ups and sit-ups every time they hit a ball in the air.

“We know we aren’t in a good spot, we know there are probably going to be changes here soon, but the message I sent to everyone is that I want to see them at their best the next few weeks. I want to see them work hard in the cages and on the mounds, I want to see them prepare well before the games. You’re going to start seeing us be better and more prepared than we have been; and that’s going to be our path for the future.”

9 BBs and 2 HBPs for one team, 1 BB for the other.

If they put Strider on the blocks for him...I'd be listening.

These 2 teams were, along with the Padres, the top systems in MLB in 2017-2018. I feel there has been some divergence in their paths based on their lineups.

He's certainly cheap enough to be given that. His 2nd arbitration year could be a bigger question. If he's this current player, he's not worth that money. HOWEVER, if you have a 1b who is on a path to a <1 WAR season right now, and you're going to hold onto him as a starter for next year, can you really even fantasize about your team being competitive? The answer is no, but that didn't stop the White Sox last offseason and it probably won't stop them in November either.

It certainly makes sense - I suppose the White Sox could know something about their budget or about Anderson that could change this calculus, but on paper here's the argument. If he's movable for a very minor return right now, the team saves $4 million this year and $14.5 million next year. Regardless of what they think their path forward is, that money is more valuable to the White Sox than either what they would get at the 2024 trade deadline if they Anderson him then or what they would get from Anderson next year.

If you want to say that they're holding him to try to be competitive, that's fine, but that's a different justification - "Hold him so we can trade him for something of value" doesn't really work any more. If we're trying to be competitive, there's a different discussion to be had, and in that one we have to consider his price - if they only have $30 million to spend (and frankly, that could be stretching it depending on what they do at the deadline, spending $30 million is a small budget cut), and they need 3 starting pitchers, and they need to replace 2 guys in the bullpen, and that's just treading water with a 4th place team so they could also use money to strengthen their lineup - that $14 million for 2024 would be something they would be in dire need of. And...although he's been slowed this year...they have a potential replacement that they could rush into place at SS next year. Neither option looks good, but its difficult for me to say that they would be better off with Anderson at SS and a $4 million starter than they would be with Montgomery rushed up to play SS and either 2 $9 million pitcher or 1 $18 million pitcher (and you'll note, that's Lynn's option price).

If he doesn't bounce back until next year, he won't be worth much at the trade deadline, because most of the time guys with 2 months of control aren't worth all that much at the trade deadline. $4 million for the last 2 months of this year and $10 million for the first 4 months of next year, $14 million ish total cost if he is movable, $18.5 million if he continues to struggle - that's a lot to "maybe be able to get a tiny bit at the trade deadline in 2024".

I believe they had 2 8-game winning streaks in 2005 alone.

We were told this team was going to be competing for the top spots in the AL this year. They're 3rd from the bottom. They let a franchise favorite go to give this guy 1b, he's a top 3 draft pick, and right now he's a middling player on his way to a 1 WAR season. He's also in his first arb year next season, so he goes from making $700k to $3-4 million to $7-8 million over the next 2 years. Whether you count all this as hate or not I don't care, "3 weeks in the minors" is no longer an excuse when a team plans for a guy to be a strong middle of the order hitter.

copying and pasting the full list on a public page would likely count as a copyright violation, so we couldn't allow that. Small excerpts about the White Sox players are likely ok, but we shouldn't host the full list here. You may do whatever you want in PMs.

This one is less objectionable than the last. The Grifol stuff may well be true, but I also don’t care. Yelling more at a bad baseball team doesn’t make them not bad. So sure, more accountability would be good, but I don’t expect it to change things. I still find it harder to criticize him for poor decisions when the team was so badly built. Bad pitchers need to pitch when your team is bad. Your lineup will contain bad players when your team is bad. I will say that “no I haven’t thought about taking Anderson out of the lead off spot” followed by him being out of the lead off spot two days later is the kind of whiplash that you do want to avoid. -the “no plate discipline thing” is clearly part of the plan. It has lasted across multiple coaching staffs and gotten worse this year. When Rick Hahn interviewed the new hitting coaches, he wanted to hear about how guys will be aggressive. This is part of their system and it’s what they hired these guys for, you can see it in the results. Vaughn and Benintendi aren’t awful but they’re not really helping either. The numbers cited here are pointless. He’s another example of a disappointing first round pick as of now, and a middling player who will be nontendered after 2024 if he keeps up this pace. That’s not saying much for him.

TBH, I think we have our share of tabloid drama.

Ooh oh don’t forget Robin Ventura’s contract extension after the super successful 2013 63 win season. That’s the sort of performance Rick wanted to define his time in the job.

Tabloid drama doesn’t sell tickets in Chicago, we know that. People show up for winning baseball teams.

I left then off because they did drop $212 million on extending Riley and $168 on extending Olson, but yes similar now and likely for the next several years.

You want to see an amazing comp on Free Agent spending? It’s the Astros. The Astros have signed 1 free agent contract of nine figures- to Carlos Lee in 2006. The entire time they have been title contenders, they haven’t signed a $100 million free agent. They have signed a $150 million deal - to keep Altuve, and another $115 for Yordan and $100 million for Bregman. So; they have signed some extensions to hold their team together, but they have been prudent in free agency under 2 different GMs. What they have done instead is have a constant supply of young talent; they’ve had a top 5 ROY finisher each of the last 5 years, despite being low in the first round all the time. They have guys like Framber that they signed internationally, they made some trades for guys who were close to FA, but because they were effective in scouting and development they haven’t needed big FAs, and they’ve had enough talent coming up that they can afford too let Correa and Springer and others walk. They have had a lower payroll than the White Sox the last 2 years.

Thank you for trying, at least if there's such a rule it isn't spelled out in some obvious way.

Ok here's the part I don't get - if Washington finished with the worst record in the league, and the top 6 picks are determined by the lottery, and the Nats only can't get a lottery pick, why wouldn't they pick #7?

I'll be honest, I can't find any reason why the Nats wouldn't be allowed to draft in the top 10. https://www.mlb.com/news/draft-rule-changes-with-new-cba