JUSTgottaBELIEVE

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Oct 5, 2016 -> 10:11 PM) I knew Conor could be a starting 3B on a playoff team!! Just needed to build around him lol They keep saying his defense improved and advanced metrics this season seem to agree. That was his biggest issue in a white sox uniform.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Oct 5, 2016 -> 08:49 PM) Conor Gillaspie starting 3B for a playoff team. Ha!

At the tender age of 27, Bumgarner is already an all time postseason great.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Oct 3, 2016 -> 09:24 AM) Mets will win and blown their only starter in the process and then get swept by the cub. Giants are the favorite and I would go as far as saying a lock if the game were in SF but with the game in NYC it's a toss up. Bumgarner has been much more effective at home than on the road this season. Syndergaard has been slightly more effective on the road than at home so it should be interesting.

A matchup with the Giants in the first round is a nightmare scenario for the Cubs. I think the Giants match up better with the Cubs than any other team in the NL. Cueto twice, Moore, and possibly Bumgarner twice if he goes on short rest in game 5. Cubs roster has a career OPS of 525 vs. Cueto and 597 vs. Bumgarner. Giants roster hasn't had much more success against Cubs starters either but in a tight low scoring game anything can happen. Not saying they are a lock to win the pennant but I think the 10:1 line on the Giants advancing to the World Series is the best bet in Vegas right now. We'll see if they can first get past Syndergaard tonight.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 01:09 AM) Sox still have the 12th pick. Can technically still get the 11th pick if they lose the last 4 and Colorado wins the last 4. But far more realistic is that the Sox could actually end up with the 12th pick if the Sox win 2 more games than the Pirates do in these last 4 games. We are 1 game "ahead" of them for the 11th pick, but we own the tiebreaker, so the Pirates would need to finish with 1 less win. So that makes us technically 1.5 GA of the Pirates for the 12th spot. EDIT: Actually, the Marlins lost today. So the Sox are only 0.5 games up on the Marlins for the 12 pick because the Marlins hold the tie-breaker over the Sox. So the 13th pick is a real possibility, with the 14th pick being possible as well. Ugh. They're just too good! Nice to see a strong finish though and a 3 or 4 win improvement from last season. It has been a steady improvement since bottoming out in 2013. Hopefully next year they take a bigger step forward with a 7 or 8 win improvement, which would put them in the thick of playoff contention.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 10:19 PM) Should that 1 other run have been unearned? Missed the play. Get that era below 3 and I think Sale backdoors his way into the Cy Young 18 wins combined with a sub 3 ERA would do it. He's got a chance

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:51 PM) Nah he's going to try to finish this one himself As I said. Great outing for Sale tonight. 6 straight starts of 8+ IP. Workhorse! Sox playing some good baseball this week. Almost back to .500

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:49 PM) Haha...now the Sox can try for their own blown save. At least Sale can get one of the mosr unusual wins of his career if Jones and Robertson cooperate. Nah he's going to try to finish this one himself

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:28 PM) The only thing surprising here is that the blown save can't come from the White Sox. If the Royals avoid Soria, it's possible they avoid the same outcome, just maybe. Abreu should have tried to work Herrera a bit more because they're asking him to go multiple innings, but swung at the first pitch. Royals pen blew it alright! In epic fashion. Who lets Carlos Sanchez beat them with a 3 run bomb? LOL at the Royals right now

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 04:01 PM) http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/09/15...-sox-.html?_r=1 Apparently before the game yesterday Abreu told a boy with cancer he'd try to hit a homerun for him. That's really really cool. Jose seems like such a class act. Not sure how anyone could not root for the guy.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 08:42 PM) That's why I asked, because someone said that was Avi's fault. That was on the very catchable foul ball that led to the first walk of the inning and would have been the second out. Not the triple two batters later

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 08:38 PM) Rodon not looking good. Started out well and seems to be struggling It's encouraging when he doesn't have his best stuff and still has a chance for a quality start.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 05:49 PM) Fisk was the better overall player because of position, but at that point in their respective careers, Baines was in his prime and Fisk was nearing the end. Unless you can argue another team would have given up the same package the Rangers surrendered. Of course, as a DH, those players forever be handicapped statistically until they come up with a better stat than WAR. That's how you could also argue a month ago that Avila was "better" than Abreu. Fisk and Baines had the same wRC+ of 129 that season. So while Baines hit really well and outhit most DHs that season the same exact thing could be said about Fisk relative to other catchers. And then obviously Fisk played the toughest position on the diamond at an above average level, that's what really separated the two that season and made Fisk the better player.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 05:30 PM) 1. The initial question asked was about the immediate impact of any new young players acquired after having been traded for the Sox' best player. I referenced 1989, when at the time Baines was traded, he was the best player on the Sox, bar none. Even better than the great Carlton Fisk, if for no other reason than Fisk missed a third of 1989 for whatever reason. If you want to make a case that Fisk was the better all around player over the course of their respective careers, you might have a point to make. But in 1989, when Baines was actually a top the league in batting average at the time of his trade, he was the better of the two. Feel free to continue to disagree, but that's my final say on that one. 2. I don't remember what "this one" was, and I don't feel like flipping back several pages to find out what it was. If it's more of the Wieters/Fowler/Volquez/Moreland sailing into the rescue next season business, forget about it. That dog won't hunt. 1. Still disagree and fangraphs would agree with me. 2. What you are talking about isn't just trading Chris Sale. If you are trading Chris Sale, you are also trading 3 or 4 of Todd Frazier, Melky Cabrera, David Robertson, Adam Eaton, Jose Quintana, and Jose Abreu. To equate that to 1989, they would be also trading Carlton Fisk, Bobby Thigpen, and Ozzie Guillen in addition to Harold Baines. Unless I am wrong and you are only in favor of moving Chris Sale and no other veterans this offseason?

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 12:52 PM) DH Harold Baines was leading the AL in hitting at the All-Star break shortly before he was traded to the Rangers that season, and was the Sox' only All Star representative that year. So up until he was traded, he was, in fact, the Sox' best player in 1989. 1. Disagree. Baines was a very good player but Fisk was still the best player on that team. 2. You didn't comment on this one?

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 10:28 AM) Sorry man but your fowler, moreland, volquez, and wieters isn't turning the sox into contenders. Volquez has a 5.00+ era and puting up -.4 war this year. Sox would be better running out fulmer tho will probably have growing pains. Moreland isnt going to upgrade the lineup that much. Lets put him to comparison of Melky. Melky has a .292 avg, .343 obp .437 slg, .780 ops, 32 2b, 10 hrs, 71 rbi's, 114 ops+ and 1.8 war vs moreland .242 avg, .312 obp, .451 slg, .762 ops, 21 2b, 22 hrs, 58 rbi's, 98 ops+ and a 1.3 war for their 2016 stats sofar. So ya moreland will give you more homeruns and higher slugging. If the sox were to contend they need a better run producer then moreland. Hes pretty much a lesser version of dunn. Fowler isn't even guaranteed to be a free agent. Still has a mutual option with the cubs for next year. If he were to become a free agent i would imagine a qualifying offer being attached and sox weren't willing to give up a pick last year for him and dont imagine again this offseason. Being that hes a boras client i imagine the cost will be pretty high and sox dont cough up money. Wieters is again a boras client so I imagine boras trying to get as much out of him as possible money wise. He probably will have qualifying offer attached too and again sox didnt want to give up pick last and probably not this year. Plus again the sox dont cough up money. Also dont know how this going to be improved pen looks like. Petricka and Putnam arent going to put the sox over top especially not knowing how healthy they will be. Sox aren't going to throw money at chapman. The 2 biggest parts of the pen in jones and Robertson have blown 16 saves together of the 28 blowns saves from the entire pen that leads the majors. Thats 57% of the blown saves coming from you best options in the pen. Sox have some holes and being in one of the weakest free agent classes is not a good place to be in. Not much in minors to fill the gabs either at the majors or not alot of depth to trade I already laid it out in other threads but I will repeat again here. Here's the lineup that I believe is absolutely a contender. I have already stated that it will cost the White Sox an additional $15-20MM in payroll compared to this season but if JR is truly going for it then these are the types of moves required to make the next step. Projected lineup using their 2016 statistics: 1. Fowler CF (833 OPS, wRC+ 127) 2. Eaton RF (798 OPS, wRC+ 116) 3. Abreu 1B/DH (832 OPS, wRC+ 119) 4. Cabrera LF (780 OPS, wRC+ 107) 5. Frazier 3B (749 OPS, wRC+ 96) 6. Moreland DH/1B (763 OPS, wRC+ 97) 7. Wieters C (701 OPS, wRC+ 84) 8. Lawrie 2B (723 OPS, wRC+ 91) / Saladino 2B (731 OPS, wRC+ 93) 9. Anderson SS (729 OPS, wRC+ 92) You have 1 very good hitter, 2 good hitters, 1 slightly above average hitter, 2 average hitters, 2 slightly below average hitters, and 1 below average hitter. I see no reason why that is anything less than a league average offense. Combine that with 4 starters carrying an ERA under 4, including 2 guys just over 3, and all you need from the #5 starter is a mid to upper 4 ERA rather than the close to 8 they have gotten this season. I also expect a bullpen of Robertson, Jennings, Jones, Putnam, Petricka, Burdi, and ? via trade or FA to be improved from this season.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 11:57 AM) They sure did, at least in 1989 they did. They traded the great Harold Baines at the trade deadline that season and brought in the very young and untested Sammy Sosa, Wilson Alvarez, and they not-so-young Scott Fletcher. Both Sosa and Alvarez would go onto contribute to the 94 win season in 1990, as would a young Ventura, Fernandez, and Frank Thomas. So you see, it's not a hypothetical. It can and has been done before. Now I'll give you it's not common for this to happen, but it can happen, which is the premise for my stance. Which again brings me back to my original point in this whole discussion, which is IF it happens (again), attendance will go up, as it did in 1990. 1. DH Harold Baines was not the best player on the 1989 roster. That would be HOF catcher Carlton Fisk. 2. What you are talking about isn't just trading Chris Sale. If you are trading Chris Sale, you are also trading 3 or 4 of Todd Frazier, Melky Cabrera, David Robertson, Adam Eaton, Jose Quintana, and Jose Abreu. To equate that to 1989, they would be also trading Carlton Fisk, Bobby Thigpen, and Ozzie Guillen in addition to Harold Baines. Unless I am wrong and you are only in favor of moving Chris Sale and no other veterans this offseason?

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 11:21 AM) No argument from me, my friend. Again, all I'm saying is simply that attendance will not go down with Sale gone if the Sox were to find a way to have a winning season next year. Nobody expected them to have winning seasons with such young rosters like they had in 1990 and 2000, and yet that's exactly what they went onto have. I have not suggested at all that it is probable it will happen again next year. My only statement is that if it did, then attendance will go up, just as it did in '90 and '00. And I'm saying it's a silly hypothetical because they are not going to improve (in terms of number of wins) year over year by trading 3 or 4 of their best players for prospects, Sale included. Did they trade their best player before the 1990 and 2000 seasons?

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 10:18 AM) Lol - will you please pay attention and read what I am saying? I never said the Sox WOULD be better NEXT YEAR by trading Sale. Let me repeat this so it'll sink in this time: I never said the Sox WOULD be better NEXT YEAR by trading Sale. What I did say was in response to a rather strange assertion that attendance would go down next year, no matter what, if Sale is traded. All I said was that would not be the case IF the Sox managed to turn things around next year and have a winning season. And that, of course, is true, because as I've also said, the game is bigger than any one player. So if our winning-starved fan base were to all of a sudden have a winning season drop in on its doorstep next year, the last thing that will happen is for attendance to go down, Sale or no Sale. That's the whole problem with your argument, your "if" statement. I will guarantee the Sox have a worse record next year if they trade Sale and start the rebuilding process this offseason. And if you don't think people come out to watch Chris Sale, then why were so many people upset and disappointed when Sale was a late scratch as a result of his suspension for ripping up the throwback jerseys? They should have been just as satisfied to watch Matt Albers start right? I think the Sox even won that game.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 09:32 AM) Actually, I said no such thing. Go back and read a little bit closer. I never said trading Sale would result in more wins next season. Never said that once. What I said was attendance would not go down with a trade of Sale IF the team turned things around and started playing winning baseball next year. Another poster said attendance was going to go down no matter what in the event Sale was traded, and I simply countered that winning baseball would prevent that from happening. Big difference. Haha ok and how are the White Sox going to be better next year by trading Sale and rebuilding? Your hypothetical situation is 100x more improbable than mine in which they can compete next season with the right signings this offseason.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) The problem is you can do the same thing with the Royals and Tigers. Strip away KC's fifth starter and they're on a pace for 94 wins and the playoffs despite everything else (tepid offense, Soria, injuries, Yost). Take away Sanchez and Pelfrey, the Tigers suddenly become one of the best teams in baseball despite JD Martinez, Castellanos and Maybin missing time. Neither team has gone 7-20 with an ERA just under 8 in starts by their fifth starter. I imagine the White Sox have gotten the least out of the fifth starter spot than any other team in baseball this year BY FAR.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Sep 14, 2016 -> 08:03 AM) Well, two things: a.) did anyone actually even say that in this thread? and b.) the silliest argument was the one put forth suggesting the additions of Matt Wieters, Edinson Volquez and Mitch Moreland would somehow transform this currently bad team into one that could compete to win the division. Now THAT was SILLY! A) your whole argument with SS2K is based on the notion that trading Sale will result in more wins next season which will lead to an increase in attendence so yes you did actually say it without saying it. If you don't think the Sox will win more games next season by trading Sale then why are you even arguing? B) of course you left out Fowler and I stand by my opinion that these 4 acquisitions plus an improved bullpen absolutely put the Sox in a position to compete next season. Already stated this before but the Sox are 7-20 when Ranaudo/Shields/Danks start. Give me an average starter in place of these dopes and that results in a 13-14 record in those games (not asking for much). Consequently, the team is 6 wins better with just that one move: 76-68 or 3 GB of the wild card. Again, that's just addressing 1 spot on the 25 man roster while leaving the rest untouched.

To think a full rebuild will result in immediate success (I.e. more wins than this season) is one of the sillier arguments I have seen on here in some time. Also, DA and SS2K are absolutely right in that a Sale trade would signal full rebuild to the fans and absolutely negatively impact attendence and overall fan interest next season even if they get a package of Moncada and Benintendi in return. Moncada has struck out in his last 8 at-bats. If that happened in a White Sox uni combined with an OPS in the Carlos Sanchez range over an entire season, which wouldn't be surprising for a kid just getting his feet wet in the big leagues, that's sure to get Sox fans excited and out to the ballpark.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Sep 10, 2016 -> 07:39 PM) Miller is the best left-handed reliever in baseball. He just brought back to Yankees 4 prospects from Cleveland including 2 of their top 3. Iglesias is one of the best( some rate him #1) defensive shortstops in baseball as well as a career .275 hitter. So you are comparing a reliever and a very good defensive shortstop but below average hitter to Sale, Q, Rodon, Abreu, and Eaton? Come on man. At the time those guys were traded, Nava was probably the most accomplished at the MLB level and he was no where near as accomplished as Sale, Q, Eaton, and Abreu are right now. It's not even close.