Balta1701

So they've signed a couple of 2 year deals but nothing long term right? Looks like they're likely to be well under the tax so they avoid any multi-year penalties, they fill in holes and hope that Clevinger Kluber has a little left in him so that maybe they can make a run at the last wild card slot if things happen to go their way, but they avoid any multi-year deals that are likely to go bad in the end and their guys on short term deals are tradeable at the deadline to help them restock? Seems like a decent strategy to me if you're in the spot they were in - an older team, guys approaching FA, but not nearly enough depth to manage a legit contender.

Worth noting that Spotrac has the Rangers payroll counting arbitration at just under $216 million. The tax line this year is $233 million, and there's always some money spent during the season when guys go on the IL, so Hendriks basically would push the Rangers up to and likely over the tax line unless they had a way to send money out somewhere.

2 years $34 million with a vesting option and other performance incentives for Eovaldi.

Ask yourself if Pedro would have the authority to say no.

He had the pacemaker before he was ever hired for the job I believe.

Weirdly I thought last year that Leury might have been the guy that the "put the ball in play" approach was the worst for. I always felt like he was swinging for the fences every time and he got a little bit of value as a backup because he'd hit .220 with a lot of strikeouts but occasionally a ball would connect and go over the fence.

I'm wondering whether the previous regime would notice success (like the improvement of Sheets, for example) and encourage that, or they'd notice that the guys weren't following the tactics they wanted and have them start doing pushups every time they pop the ball up (Major League reference).

This was a useful and detailed response and completely helpful and on subject and not at all trolling as it's not bringing in a completely unrelated discussion point into this thread.

Genuinely wondering something. Some players had to have the notion that "hitting the ball on the ground and the other way isn't the best idea and this has to be affecting my career", right? Especially people like Pollock, who had experience with other systems had to know that. So what do you do when you're not getting information and scouting reports from the team, but you know that type of training and planning is vital for your earnings? Do you go outside the organization or do you just go without it and try to do what the coaches are telling you to do?

If you're only interested in triumphant projections about the White Sox then you probably should skip all projection threads this year.

Here’s a post player movement update on the Steamer predictions. They have the White Sox second in the AL Central, 1.3 games ahead of Minnesota on average but 6.6 games behind Minnesota. https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/35292245/ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-biggest-free-agents-signed It’s paywalled so here’s just the White Sox excerpt:

Santos has options yes, but Ruiz does not. Ruiz is arb 1 so his contract becomes guaranteed if he makes the opening day roster.

The end result of course being that the white Sox sign this guy then the magic trade proposal for Hendriks never comes and they wind up cutting Santos and that guy they got in the rule V draft because they have so many arms, followed by both of them becoming all star relievers in a few years for other teams.

Many of them get derailed. But if your team doesn’t have the talent of a team that should win that many, you won’t survive the season and playoffs.

How about this version. If you don’t look at your roster at the start of the year and think “this team should win 100 games”, you need to be thinking about how you will get there long term, because titles go to Teams with good answers to that question:

This thread was made after Benintendi was already signed. This wasn’t saying sign him instead of Benintendi, It was saying that an outfield of Benintendi/Robert/Colas/Hamilton/Reyes is still not particularly impressive, particularly on the back side. It is difficult to say that assessment is wrong on paper.

I would say that if you want to win a title in the modern era you need to build a team that can push nearly 100 wins. Now a team good enough to win 100 games may not do so. They may lose multiple players to injuries and win 90 or even 82 games. They may win 97 games and not win a title that year or ever. They may need to come in as a number 1 seed , disappoint, and get playoff experience first. But basically all of them start as teams that can win 95 or more games, that talent level is a baseline. If you don’t have that talent level, you will run into too many teams better than you and you can’t find your way through that gauntlet.

Does it matter if you have a shot if in reality it’s an extremely remote shot? The setup you’re describing illustrates the point. Yes, the Diamondbacks, the Rockies, the Phillies have reached the World Series, but in all those cases they have to go through multiple really good teams on the way there. They drain everything they have getting to the title round and then get finished off by a championship caliber team from the other league, a team which has more depth and can sustain their run.

How about this one. Every single champion since 2003 has had a 94 win season or better. They may not have peaked in the regular season where they won their title, but they won at least 94 within 2 years of winning their title. The only one that peaked at 94 was the Giants. The Royals peaked at 95. The Red Sox had a run of 95 win teams. if you want to win a title these days, you need to put a 95 win team on the field. Sometimes your 95 win team will have a bad playoff run but gain experience to win the next year, but they won that many games for a reason, and it wasn’t a crappy division.

So the White Sox are taking on $50 million and paying the Luxury Tax? Jerry Reinsdorf.

If your window is open, you should probably close it. That cold front was serious it got all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. I’ve seen 4 people in this neighborhood here in Texas with busted pipes from freezing.

I’d actually like to know which team is this example of a team that is built to maybe win 89 games, sneaks into the playoffs, and then wins a title. The most recent example I have might be the 03 Marlins? 04 - Boston. Was a wild card team, improbable ALCS, but was also a perennial playoff team and will show up again soon. 05 - might be the team on here with the least sustained success. Might be the most out of nowhere title in 20 years. 06 - Cardinals - everyone makes a big deal of them winning 82 games, but the same team won 100 games the year before and was in the 04 World Series. That’s a sustained period of excellence. 07 - hey Boston again, maybe they weren’t a fluke. 08 - Phillies - was a surprise at the time but they made the playoffs 5 straight years. 09 - Yankees. Most recent example I have of a team getting a title in FA. 10. 12. 14. Giants. There were a couple wild card appearances in there but that’s seriously sustained success. 11 - Cardinals again. 13 - Red Sox again. 15 - Royals - complete rebuild, “best system in baseball history”, two straight World Series appearances. 16 - Cubs - made NLCS the year before, 5 straight playoff appearances. 17 - Astros. Bit of help from a trash can, but have made the playoffs every year since. 18 - Red Sox again. 19 - Nationals - was a wild card team, but had 5 playoff appearances and 4 division titles since 2012, never finished worse than second. 20 - Dodgers. Definition of sustained success. 21 - Braves - have now won the NL East 5 straight years. 22 - Astros again. This seems very non random to me. There are zero examples of the Rockies or Marlins or Diamondbacks or Pirates sneaking in with an 88 win season and winding up with a title. Teams like that have made the World Series a couple times but I don’t see a win. Every one of them is a multi-year contender who wins their division repeatedly, the shortest stint other than the 05 White Sox is probably the Royals who couldn’t afford to keep a team that made two straight World Series appearances together. Titles are going to franchises that are excellent for years.

And what he wants doesn’t mean what he gets either, but that doesn’t stop his agent from trying to get it. Straight up same contract, would you have taken Clevinger or Wacha?

Yes, he’s a free agent. He was notably better than Clevinger last year, so you have to expect he’s holding out for more money than Clevinger, possibly more than 1 year, and maybe a likely starting spot.