michelangelosmonkey

I can't imagine that back firing. Lottery tickets NEVER hit.

Sorry I didn't understand your definition of "run producer" as a slugger. Of course that's true...but when Vaughan comes up we have about six guys that can hit 30 homers. Madrigal as a guy that gets on base at a .370 clip, steals 40 bases and plays gold glove second base...every day...seems more valuable than a short term shot at WS that is a bit of a gamble anyway.

HAHA....in your own argument you admit that players can go from worst to first. I did not say Lopez is a phenom. I'm just reacting to the suggesting that he's worthless. Somehow he's Dylan Covey. He's given a number of data points that he might be good. I wrote someplace earlier how very good he's been in about 80% of his starts...it's just when he was bad he was horrible.

I think that is ridiculous to question his manhood. Seems like it was less than a year ago that he went into Cleveland when they were fighting for a playoff spot and he threw a 1 hitter with 11 strikeouts and a few starts later held the Tigers to one run and struck out 9 in 8 innings?? When he is good he is very good (OK and when he's bad hes awful) still he's only 26...and he can throw it 98. Why must we give up on every young player after a couple of bad performances?

Metrics? He won the gold glove for all minor league second basemen. I mean...someone likes his defense.

And by the way...shouldn't dynastic greatness be in play? The pieces are falling in place. I know it's still a long shot but if Vaughan is Frank Thomas and Madrigal is Rod Carew?? Trading a shining potential for 36 starts of admittedly a very good pitcher seems to aggressive of a move...we are the 1969 Reds.

OH come one...you have defined 23 year old Madrigal after 17 major league at bats? Wasn't he named the best fielding second baseman in all the minors last year? You know who else was a single hitting, great bat control, little power, rare walking (until later in his career) second baseman. Rod Carew...and he had nearly 50 WAR in a 7 year stretch. I like Mendick but he's almost 27 and has never done anything in his career that suggests greatness.

It seems like they have a plan with Collins...though it's hard to see what it is. For all the talk of him being a terrible catcher...I've seen both of his games this year and he looked good. In fact outside of the one Drew Anderson meltdown, all of the pitchers seemed to pitch well with him catching. As you say, lefty with a great eye and plus power that could catch 50 games a year and costs nothing seems like a valuable asset.

Saying I'm not dealing with reality? That I have nothing to learn? I SAID you were right. Shields WAS a disaster. The trade WAS terrible. But just because you "thought" he was terrible at the time, and many posters thought he was terrible, didn't make you right and the trade unsupportable. Please show me the reality that Shields was guaranteed to be a disaster...you can't because it's not there. You make it sound like I'm making up my own reality...that before his single terrible outing Shields in 2016 didn't have a 3.06 ERA and 1 WAR in the first 1/3 of the season after having years of success including some years of dominance. Why is his run up to the trade different that Randy Johnson evidence I provided? I think if you looked at RJ and Shields at the same age and after the 1/3 of the season RJ seemed way more likely to be done...and Seattle was spectacularly wrong about that. And Tatis? The VAST majority of young prospects end up being nothing. Tatis was an international free agent and any team, including the San Diego could have had him for baseball chump change....now three years later he's the best player in baseball? That's not luck? As for denigrating my Soxtalk Brethren...they are all filled with strong opinions....Giolito is a disaster, Moncado is a disaster, Collins is a disaster, Madrigal is a disaster, Lopez is a disaster, Abreau is a disaster, Anderson is a disaster...this week Grandal is a disaster, EE is done, Cease is worthless. There is a TON of negativity...And you Cali...one of my favorite posters and more reasoned people here are wrong about this issue...wrong to be angry about trading for a chance to win and giving up a AAAA pitcher and a lottery ticket. The trade at the time was a bold move to try to get the playoffs with a team that had major pieces. It didn't work and ended up changing the organization approach. But if it had worked...it would have been a fun play off ride with Sale unstoppable that year. It would never be remembered except for our including that lottery ticket.

Why? Because people said, based on his most recent outing and his age, that Shields was done? You are not trying to tell me that people on Soxtalk jumped to wild conclusions based on a single data point??? There are lots of examples of 34 year old pitchers that resurrect their career...at 34 Rich Hill had averaged a negative WAR his previous 7 years and then had 10 WAR the next 5 years. Also lots of pitchers at 34 that fall off the cliff. Randomness happens. You were right...but it didn't really matter because it only cost us money, a AAAA pitcher and Ryan Goins so it was worth the gamble...I mean, unless Ryan Goins becomes the best player in baseball...hahahahahaha...oh shit.

Hahn didn't have the power in 2016. This was still Kenny's team and he was still the big gambler hoping to hit it big like in 2005. I didn't support this...I was part of the rebuild believers...but it was not unreasonable. Sale/Quintana/Rodon put up a +12 WAR that year. Nate Jones/David Robertson/Dan Jennings/Zach Duke had a +6 WAR as the core of potentially a very good relief staff. Adam Eaton was elite that year, Tim Anderson had a very promising rookie year and you had Abreau and a bunch of old vets that compromised a reasonable offense. The idea wasn't bad the results were. People here pretend that they KNEW Shields was toast at the point of the trade...but that's fiction. Shields had averaged 3.9 WAR the previous five years, and in 2016 he had a 3.06 ERA...2.5 to 1 K/BB rate and a +1 WAR until his last start in San Diego where he gave up 10 runs in 2 innings. If you want to say you were ready to throw out the previous 5 years and 10 very good starts because he had a bad two innings I'm skeptical. You would have been RIGHT but you had basically no evidence to support it. Shields was 34 at the time of the trade. Randy Johnson was 34 in 1998 and after his first ten starts had a 7 ERA...about the point in the season where Sox got Shields. Seattle traded Johnson who then put up a 44 WAR in the next 4.5 years. Sometimes you get lucky. As for San Diego targeting Tatis...I mean ok...after the White Sox said...you can't touch these 40 prospects. You know how unlikely it is for a non-top 30 prospect to even sniff the major leagues? San Diego likely said "well he's very young, plays short stop and his father was a major leaguer. Of all the garbage he's the most likely to maybe become a reasonable back up major league shortstop. The odds of Tatis then becoming the best player in baseball is so remote its not worth talking about. We wouldn't have these endless arguments if Tatis becomes Ryan Goins. This was not a master stroke of talent genius by the Padres this was damn luck. Damnable luck.

Everything is obvious in retrospect. Cole Hamels was a washed out veteran pitcher who was TERRIBLE for the Rangers in 2018 and then went to the Cubs and put up a 2.4 WAR in the second half of 2018 for the Cubs. If Shields does that instead of the -2.1. They may have had a chance. Having the White Sox role the dice on the Sale/Quintana/Rodon/Shields/ David Robertson/Nate Jones pitching staff to lead them to the playoffs where anything can happen was not the dumbest move ever made. Throwing in some nobody was meaningless. It didn't work out but the failure led to the rebuild. You take chances in life and shaking your fist at the clouds after the fact really doesn't help.

We paid overslot for Curbelo...he was a top 10 prospect for us in 2016 at 18 and played short stop. ALL 18 year old are random outcomes. If we had traded Curbelo instead no one ever talks about this trade. We only talk about it because it blew up in our faces. As I said early, it is a legitimate argument to make that we should NEVER throw in a lottery ticket in any trade. In this trade it seems San Diego should have thrown in the lottery ticket. But the odds that Tatis, Jr became Tatis, Jr had to be tens of thousands to one. It sucks but we did NOT trade a future super star for Shields as the board seems to think. We traded a raw kid that any reasonable baseball scout would have said is not nearly as likely to succeed as Curbelo.

Everyone sees something in their lottery tickets. If you are going to take a wild swing...go with a 17 year old shortstop with major league roots. If you are going to buy a lottery tickets don't play popular numbers (because you will then split with someone else). The Padres were't going to get Curbelo because he wasn't a lottery ticket. So they looked way down at the bottom of the Sox barrel and said...well throw in this guy. And yes...if there is a criticism...don't ever put a lottery ticket in a birthday card because its almost always worthless but when it's not its a disaster.

At some point we need to get over this. We included a powerball ticket in a birthday card and it turned out to be the $100 million ticket. Does that make us the biggest idiots ever or really really really unlucky? In retrospect it was a horrible decision but at the time Tatis wasn't in the top 150 players in the Sox organization and if we had thrown in Luis Curbelo instead (18 year old SS, #7 in our top prospects list in mid year 2016) we would have been OUTRAGED at the huge overpay for Shields and today we would say we got nothing for nothing. Instead...we put a $1 piece of paper that was almost certainly going to be worthless into the birthday card and now we continually lose our minds at the weird randomness of the world.

Babe Ruth's first few games in the majors have shown exactly what we should have expected from him: An interesting pitching prospect that really can't hit. As I write this Ruth has been involved in 17 chances and yielded only 3 safeties. His thunderous swing has created 7 dust storms and but a single free pass. He'll always have trouble with the old uncle charlie. Mr Ruth has shown proclivity to tossing the old horse hide and he needs to set aside the lumber to concentrate on throwing a hammer because he will never be able to hit it. Ridick Ulace Conclusion theoldtimeidiot.com (note...baseball reference is amazing...game logs from 1914??? It is the greatest sport).

Fernando Tatis, JR first few games in the majors have shown exactly what we should have expected from him: A young, over matched hitter who's minor league swing and miss issues will get worse in the majors. As I write this Tatis Jr has a .200 batting average, .360 slugging percent, 9 strikeouts in 25 at bats and a single home run off of a AAAA Arizona pitcher. This is pretty much what he is. He'll hit for some power off of bad pitchers, play a decent shortstop but his low contract rate will doom him to being a mediocre player. Charley Rushtojudgment theidiot.com

I'll take it. Idiotic defending Lopez hours before he's going to face this Twins lineup. The Twins are going to make a lot of 5th starters look like...well...5th starters

I just did a search of AL pitchers that threw more than 20 starts last year and of all the AL pitchers Reylo was the 5th youngest (Gio is younger, Cease is younger but didn't qualify...man our future is so bright). Of all the 20 start pitchers, in his terrible year, Reylo had the 43 highest WAR. There are LOTS of terrible fourth and fifth starters....there were more than 80 starters in the AL with at least a dozen starts that had a negative WAR. Reylo is not one of them. At his worst he's one of the best bad pitchers out there...and young with a upside. OK I'm done...he's getting shelled today but there's reason for hope.

Ok now I'm down the rabbit hole. Last year...Reylo's terrible year...he was 34th in the AL for highest percent of quality starts at 45%. Blake Snell was less likely than Reylo to have a quality start. To suggest that a fifth starter can't be bad 1/3 of his starts? I think almost no 5th starters WEREN'T bad in 1/3 of their starts....and when Reylo was good he was very good.

Yeah...I think it's fair to be worried about today. This Twins offense is really good...and Lopez gives up lots of fly balls and homers...except when he's dominant which he CAN be. I don't think Maeda can be dominant...I think the Sox score 5 today and its up to Lopez to stop them from getting five. If Lopez can be good? The ceiling for this team is otherworldly.

Just checking...in 2018 he gave up 2 or fewer runs in 20 of his 32 starts. Difference between last year and 2018 is he had more terrible starts last year. Doesn't that seem like a thing that coaching can fix?

In his ten best starts last year Lopez was 8-0 with a 0.80 ERA, struck out 11 per 9 and 3 1/2 to 1 strikeout to walk ratio. That's not a single fluky start...that's a third of the season. And Lopez the year before, at 24, was pretty good with sub 4 ERA in 32 starts. There is something there. To say he can't put it all together is just too pessimistic. Fulmer basically strung together nothing so to say he just needed to put it together was too optimistic.

A fifth starter that has very good stuff 2/3 of the time? I don't think any pitcher has his best stuff 100% of the time. 1/3 is too much...and as I stated earlier I was ready to give up on him...but he's only 26 and its not impossible for him to get better. I mean he HAS the stuff. He just needs to be more consistent. We were all ready to give up on Giolito last year in April.

So I was looking at it. Are we too hard on Lopez? He had 33 starts last year and 10 were terrible...as I mentioned earlier a 14 ERA in those starts. In his other 23 starts he had a 3.3 ERA and 3 to 1 walks to strikeouts. So 2/3 of the time he was a very good pitcher and 1/3 of the time he was the worst pitcher in the history of baseball. If he is the good Lopez he is way better than Maeda ever was.