35thstreetswarm

One year ago the #1 would be the Phillies. Do with that what you will.

It seems like everyone has grasped the idea that Hahn deliberately says nothing when he speaks. But somehow that doesn't stop everyone from busting out their decoder rings and dissecting his every phrase when he does. For god's sake, the answer is always "drink more Ovaltine", people. We'll eventually learn what the Sox are up to, but it won't be through Hahn's press statements.

Agreed. Way too many people are falling victim to the tendency to take the immediate past season and project it forward into eternity. Every baseball season is its own independent story. It's not that crazy for a team -- especially one with sufficient talent to have back-to-back playoff appearances -- to have a bad year and bounce back. But they absolutely need to add to/tinker with what they have if they want to have a shot.

I was just joking - don't drag me into your thing

My Sox fandom suggests otherwise.

Well, the November 30 renewal deadline came and went and I did not renew. I actually meant to, and maybe I'm just convincing myself after missing a deadline, but I'm totally fine with it. The playoff ticket eligibility advantages of my 20-game plan can, as others have mentioned, be largely matched by signing up for next year if the season turns out well, and I really won't miss the hassle associated with unloading tickets I inevitably can't use. Plus it's just so easy to walk up and buy tickets to just about any regular season game. So I guess the FO can blame a failure to sign a meaningful free agent bat on me.

Criminally underrated, even by his own fan base. The consummate pro. The best thing to happen to the Sox since the WS. It absolutely kills me to see him sign with that lowlife franchise. He will be missed, and when he retires I'll probably get an Abreu jersey.

Being on record as hating the idea of Jose in an Astros uniform for sentimental reasons...I will say that I find the resistance to this move a little puzzling since the prevailing sentiment on this board seems to be that we should be a "smarter," more progressive organization like the Rays, Guardians, etc. Well, this happens to be one time the Sox are acting like those orgs -- they are jettisoning an aging veteran because they managed to line up a cheap, capable replacement behind him. This will allow them to allocate resources where they're more needed (whether they actually *will* do that is another story.) It hurts, but face it, it's exactly the kind of move smart organizations make. Signing Abreu to a big deal because we love him is the meatball move.

I get it (remember even the Astros have let multiple key players "walk" though undoubtedly did a better job replacing them than we will), but it will really suck watching one of my favorite White Sox of all-time join that gross franchise. Would have preferred anywhere else, even the Cubs.

I love the gray road unis, the black alternates, and the City Connects. The current uniform combos are their best ever. Always hated the '80s beach blanket unis, even more now that they're so overused. I REALLY hated the vests that I understand some posters love -- I call them the Ligue Jerseys. The Dick Allen reds, '68 blues, and Field of Dreams unis are all solid throwbacks.

Agree. This uniform redesign just feels totally unnecessary. I thought the gold-lined letters they introduced just a few years back were unique and really great -- they really popped on the dark blue unis in particular. Not sure why they got rid of those so quickly. All the new options are fine, but a downgrade from their current unis imo. And the M looks like Miami as stated above.

Yes, this is the kind of shakeup and infusion of youth that I could get behind.

Really? I think it's a pretty conservative "shakeup" to just trade Crochet, Graveman, and Sheets.

Well, they could get Rizzo, Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber and that wouldn't do it...

That would be crazy if it was true, but it almost certainly isn't.

Yes, I think it goes without saying that if you take a bad year and project every trend to continue indefinitely, you're going to see...other bad years. The Guardians, by the way, could have done the same after last season. I think people who are hopeful are assuming things will be better next year, as sometimes happens in baseball. Also, I just want to note that it's mindbending to see the identically-shaped and reasoned posts on the polar opposite ends of the spectrum just a year or so apart. Are you one of those people who phonebanked for Obama in '12 and stormed the Capitol in '21? ?

The lineup is there largely because of Harrison (not on the team anymore) Abreu (likely not on the team anymore, and not exactly an aging “problem” last year anyway), and Andrus (likely not on the team anymore). Also Pollock, who is hardly figured to be a driver of this team’s success. This does not tell a meaningful story about this year’s team at all.

You’ve done this “the Sox are old” thing before and it’s misleading. The Sox core is not old, and most of it pretty young. Grandal is showing his age, sure, but dragging up the “average age” with a bunch of peripheral players doesn’t really tell a meaningful story. There’s no requirement that we ding the Sox on *every* possible metric.

I don't really think World Series rings or pennants are the kinds of *achievements that need scare quotes. Even if they date from the ancient mid- twenty- teens, before many posters even had iPhone 10s

I must be missing the joke about this statement, which is objectively true

It's weird reading about Grifol as someone who lacks championship experience over and over...Grifol won a WS with the Royals. That makes him the only serious candidate with a WS with his current org, no? Espada with Houston, Mendoza with Yankees, Long with Phillies, Quatraro with Rays, all no. (Well, I guess Washington won one with the Braves, maybe I'm missing another) It's also weird that the entire baseball world seems to have blocked the Royals back-to-back WS appearances only a few years ago out of their consciousness. I sometimes think they were a dream.

Peter Griffin

Well, it's not TLR. And it's not Ozzie. And it's not some other incestuous, keep-it-in-the-organization hire that would have the hallmarks of a JR cramdown. In other words, this doesn't look like a ridiculous unforced error and seems to have come about as a result of a normal, wide-ranging interview process. I'm fine with this and am prepared to give the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best.

Yeah, I don't disagree with that. I wouldn't let Ozzie within 100 yards of the organization. But we know JR (in the same breath he said Ozzie would never come back) said he feels enough loyalty toward Ozzie that he's recommended him for multiple jobs with other orgs. Add that to the many things I don't understand about how JR operates.

That's not really responsive to my point, which is that the TLR hire does not serve as any sort of preview for an Ozzie hire. You have given a reason why it's strange Ozzie was interviewed in this round, which is different. To that point I guess I would say that it's not all that surprising to me that they'd give Ozzie a courtesy interview -- even if they don't plan to hire him -- given his publicly stated desire for the job and his continued connection to the organization. If he's not hired, there's no inconsistency with JR's prior statements at all.