he gone.

If the Rockies sign him then color me confused. I follow the Sox, Astros, Rox, Cardinals and Rays the most as kind of my go-to teams. I developed a few teams I enjoyed watching when the Sox were so bad and I wanted to watch good baseball. I have no idea why they'd add another guy to the mix ... Blackmon is an everyday RF. Puig cannot man CF on any consistent basis -- plus they have Dahl in LF. CF should be manned by Hilliard or Tapia. With no DH - I don't get it. (also you can maybe add in Desmond who is just dead weight). They also have Garret Hampson who can man CF as a UTIL. Regardless, their corner OF's are everyday type guys. Sure his stats would be inflated, but I find it tough to get him 50 games with the Rockies. That roster is bloated with talent & would benefit from offloading a few of their younger guys for SP rather than adding a Puig for no reason. The Indians, Tigers, Sox, Orioles, BoSox, San Fran, Seattle. Those are the teams that could use him. Hell even the Northside if you squint cause I don't believe in Souza or Happ.

i may regret this ... but I'm in. Hoping balancing three leagues/drafts/lineups/pickups isn't too much.

give it to Puig - he's a polarizing figure. He drives traffic. He drives conversation. He brings eyeballs. Say what you may - but those type of players generally resonate a lot with the younger fan base 5-21 years old. Also this should be moved to the Puig thread. No need for two Puig threads hah.

I'd be interested in a league - whether that be H2H points or H2H categories. However if we do points I'd suggest a format that follows this more: (sorry for the formatting) I've been in a league now for 18 years and we've revised this over and over each year to make it the best possible. Wins and Losses for pitchers have found to be a bad representation - think Quintana with the Sox. Same with losses. You can have a pitchers duel and lose 10 pts. We've also revised saves down and added holds as we've found closers to be almost like kickers in football. Batting Runs Scored (R) 1 Singles (1B) 1 Doubles (2B) 2 Triples (3B) 3 Home Runs (HR) 4 Runs Batted In (RBI) 1 Walks (BB) 1 Strikeouts (K) -1 Hit by Pitch (HBP) 1 Stolen Bases (SB) 2 Pitching Innings Pitched (IP) 3 Hits Allowed (H) -1 Earned Runs (ER) -2 Walks Issued (BB) -1 Hit Batsmen (HB) -1 Strikeouts (K) 1 Quality Starts (QS) 3 Shutouts (SO) 3 Saves (SV) 5 Holds (HD) 5

also kris bryant is going to the indians and lindor to the cubs. Because that would clear salary for the indians somehow? the more he tweets the crazier he looks.

also the intel guy on twitter said puig is going to the braves. I hope he is. It would be perfect. It would close this thread ... and the arenado one would EXPLODE hahah

I forget that mute doesn't work when quoting is used. doh! Enough with the speeding thing. Good lord. Focus on baseball.

The Rockies are the best bet in Vegas currently for the team win totals. Especially because it's likely to drop another few games if they get rid of Arenado for SP -- which to me actually makes their team better. Tough to lose an Arenado and get better, but i think that's exactly where the Rockies are.

but it does - especially depending on what else the rockies may be getting. Bryant can play the OF which allows McMahon to slot in at 3B and Hampson/Rodgers to play 2B this year. Then next year when Murphy is gone, McMahon slots in at 1B, Hampson at 2b, and Rodgers at 3B. Bryant mans the outfield with Hilliard, Dahl, Blackmon. It gives their lineup greater flexibility both financially and with the lineup card. Still not the best trade they can make though - they should be looking to get two SP arms that are groundball guys out of Arenado. Or 1SP prospect and ridding of the Desmond contract that has 3yr/$40mm remaining on it. If they do that they legit can be back to a 90-95 win team. Marquez, Gray, newly acquired SP, Freeland + that lineup + an extra $45mm in payroll flexibility.

We're also getting Joc Pederson. Arenado and Joc Pederson! We're locked and loaded! But seriously - part of me wants him to be right. He's really doubling and tripling and whatever word fits for 20X down. Not sure why he's getting so specific and acting like this is happneing...

But it won't matter, because Mazara's here now. For better or worse, he'll probably fall on his face this year because he's about as mobile as a drunk Paul Konerko." I mean, that's the real truth. Puig isn't happening. I thought he might earlier in the off season, but the Sox have made enough comments that basically confirm that he'll be our RF. I still think the man has significant talent, however my issue is that it's a very Sox move. It always seems like the Sox are stuck in 2003 mode or something while much of the rest of the MLB is adjusting. Like the Rays are out there with Kiemeirer (butchered the spelling) and Margot in the OF with such plus defenders (not to mention Meadows). Any ball hit to the OF is going to be caught. Meanwhile we're trotting out Eloy AND Mazara. And don't get me wrong, you have to sacrifice somewhere. Not everybody is Trout. So you're going to have people like Eloy who are an offensive monster and meh in the field, but my problem with Mazara stems from the fit. Where's the fit short OR long term? So let's say all of a sudden he does breakout ... he hits 35HR, drives in 100, etc. Is that really a long term solution on a championship team ... to have Robert act like Superman while Eloy and Mazara man the corners? With Vaughn and the extension to Abreu he can't really shift to the DH. When someone makes a prediction thread for the year I'll go in more detail, but this team's big issue is that it's a station to station team (young inconsistent pitching will be the other issue). But this is going to be AJ, Konerko, Thome type of baseball which can be frustrating (and fun). There are going to be innings where EE, Abreu, Eloy all single back to back to back and then we strikeout and ground into a DP and get nothing out of 3 hits. Mazara, Grandal can be added to that list. We can have 5 guys in a row who can't run. Thank god we balance it a bit out with Robert and Madrigal being added. (also Moncada and Anderson). But ideally to me our RF is more like George Springer. That type of lineup - station to station and somewhat all or nothing hitters can win you baseball games in stretches, but it also isn't conducive to winning consistently which i think is going to be the biggest problem this year. Winning consistently. We'll see flashes but not consistency. So that's my issue with Mazara.. and also why i think Puig is a better fit on this team. I'd gladly dump Mazara to a bench role in favor of Puig, because even though neither are likely to work out, at least you can squint and see how Puig could be part of the longer term solution for the Sox

I almost have the opposite mindset ... if it was for 2024 I'd say no - but 2020 is kind of the year that maybe we find a diamond in the rough. Both Puig and Mazara are extremely talented. You aren't rated a Top 20 prospect and hit HR balls 500 FT like Mazara without talent. And likewise you don't finish top 20 in MVP voting twice without talent. For the price we'd get both at I think it's worth the risk. Plus more than ever Puig knows his back is against the wall. A zebra doesn't change his stripes - so the gambling odds would be that it doesn't work out -- but hell, who cares this year. Maybe he behaves and has a monster year.

To be fair there's always a villain and once you're the villain it's a tough title to shed. We act like we watched 162 games of him for 6 years ... the fact is we haven't. I think sometimes as fans we act like some of these issues are the end of the world. We like to hear the stories from Grandal about how he's at the ballpark 10-12 hours a day and how he can't stand to lose and each loss eats at him. We love a good soundbite. At the end of the day though - talent wins. And winning brings a team together. Puig is talented and certainly deserving of a roll of the dice at $3-6mm. Hell give him a $2mm deal with a ton of incentives for all i care. Also if a guy like Grandal who spends 12 hours at the ballpark a day & gets that pissed at losing says Puig is okay and gave his blessing? Then it really can be that bad.

That article is a lot of conjecture - it's like most articles online nowadays. Words for the sake of words. The article doesn't even say what the vice president of public affairs said about Puig and then follows that up with they'd be interested in him on a one year deal. The rest of the article is the normal rah rah about how Puig is not a good teammate. Puig is definitely not the brightest bulb - but things like him saying he wasn't trying as hard because he was under contract for a few more years? I mean .... like it or not ... there's likely a good number of players who have done or thought the same -- the only difference is they have the brain to not say it out loud and to the media... I really don't think Puig is likely a bad person - just immature. He's got his red flags - but those are priced in ... he'd be getting a 2-3 year deal at 8-10mm a year if he didn't come wtih the baggage.

haha the speeding thing makes me laugh on this thread. i hadn't clicked this thread in a few days and almost got trapped into responding to some of the hypocrisy but i'll stick to Puig. Another thing to consider is the cheap Indians - if we sign Puig we also block them from the Tribe picking him up cheap too. In the grand scheme of things I know hes not THAT much of a game changer.. but I'd guess the odds on favorites for Puig is CLE. I'd much rather see him on teh Sox than play against him all year.

Also I'm pretty sure Kipnis really wanted to be in Chicago regardless if that was the Cubs or Sox. I think he would've taken a minor league deal on either team.

Two way street thing makes sense. Some of these guys are probably holding out hope that they can play a bigger role. Madrigal is just too solid of a prospect - he's not going to be the guy who comes up and then is sent down to work on things. He's going to be brought up and hit above .280 immediately and provide defense. That's why any person we'd bring in needs to be able to bounce around the diamond. I've said it 100 times like a broken record but Scooter would be my guy. Maybe he's not great in some of the other positions but going back to just 2017 he has played 2b, 3b, LF, RF, DH. probably doesnt grade out great at those spots, but he did well enough that the Reds started him 10 games in the OF, 15 games overall, and spent 10 games at 3B. To me, that's your guy. He can take 25 games in the OF for us, the first 30 games at 2B, 15 games at 3B, 10 at DH, and then 10 games at 2B as a backup ... That's nearly 100 games. Not sure if that's enough playing time from his perspective, but I'd take it.

I'd have to take a long thought process here - but I think what you said is true. It definitely doesn't stop the TOTAL tanks. However there may be less total tanks with the playoff rules. I think of teams like the Pirates .... or maybe even the Old Sox. Think of the years with Sale and Quintana, etc. All of a sudden some of those years we make the playoffs & couldve easily won a 3 game series. All of a sudden the next year you may be adding more shitty veterans like LaRoche, etc. instead of tearing down. Always retooling, signing FA, etc. rather than tanking. I think I'd liken it almost to the NHL the most .... you'd have basically 20 teams with a shot of winning the Cup. However out of those 20 ... maybe 10 really have a shot. and then really, really only 5 or so teams that are locks. For instance this year it would allow us as Sox fans to really get excited. Because I think its viable we are a top 7 team in the AL (Yanks, Astros, Rays, A's, Twins, Cleveland, Sox, Rangers, Angels, BoSox ... mayyyybe Toronto -- in that order too) All of a sudden you're seeing a team like the Sox, Blue Jays, etc maybe making one more signing this offsesaon. Betts isn't getting traded and BoSox make another effort this year. It really benefits the small market teams the most - which maybe is what the MLB is trying to accomplish. The problem is it hurts the top teams. There will be so many times that a 98 win team just loses in the first round and that would be maddening. Meanwhile a year like this -- the Sox could conceivably make it a few rounds. In a 3 game series you could throw out any combination of pitching.

I agree with this. I always think its such a misrepresentation when playoffs roll around. In the regular season you have to survive on SP depth and your 4/5 guys are very integral part of winning 100 games. But then you get to the playoffs and theres so many off days that teams just basically play their top 3 SP. Thats how you end up with the Nationals winning it all ... not saying they weren't deserving ... but that's the recipe right now. Get yourself a 3 headed monster and you can win the WS.

True. Sox for sure. We haven't won in a decade either - so we're going to have to get used to paying more soon, but yes for right now I've found Sox games extremely affordable & fun. There's even a part of me that's going to miss the ease of beer lines, bathroom lines, putting my feet up, a seat in between me, etc. I'm not sure people who are fans of the Cubs though would agree. And yes, I also get that the NBA and NFL and NHL tickets cost more ... but there is also a bit of supply and demand going on there. Half the games in NHL and NBA, half the sized arena .. NFL has 8 games, etc. So there are other factors - which in theory should actually help baseball be more popular. I still think the biggest issue is the duration. I personally am a HUGE baseball fan. I think all of us on a message board in February would qualify. I am in several fantasy leagues, get the MLB package every year, watch random games, etc. However when it comes to the playoffs and are supposed to be the BEST games? I find myself losing interest sometimes when the games are clocking in at almost 4 hours and don't end until 11-12pm. That's just not a sustainable product. If the games started at 6:30CST and lasted 2hr 30m you'd be bringing in more kids which are ultimately the lifeline and future of sports. If I was the Sox - and I'm sure theres a whole set of guidelines I'm unaware about - but I'd have game time start at 6:30pm CST during school -- so April through memorial day. I'd do my best to tell my batters and pitchers to shorten the game (i.e. no steppign out of the box, stepping off mound, etc.) While everybody else is moving so slow, I'd use it as an advantage both in the real world to drive tickets and viewership, as in baseball. I have no doubt some of Buehrle's success came from keeping batters off balance by firing the ball in quickly and taking them off their routine.

The idea from MLB perspective - make it so that more teams are in the race until the end and have a chance. Therefore it will drive trades, FA signings, etc. This should in theory drive attendance and viewership - therefore ad money. Once you make the playoffs anything can happen within reason (think more NFL rather than NBA) and this is good for business. The reality -- the MLB is missing the point. The MLB just doesn't seem to get it - it's not how many teams are in the running - it's the fact that you aren't bringing in young viewership. This starts at the ballpark - where it's generally too expesnive nowadays for a family to attend. Now the bad teams have done their best & I actually think it's affordable in many locations ..... as long as you adhere to the deal -- aka the Sox for like 4UD tix + 4 dogs + 4 drinks for like $48 or something. That's a good deal. But you can't freely go to the park and get whatever food you want or park where you want, etc. for a good price. But that horse has been beat to death & we all know it needs revising like the Atlanta Falcons have tried to do thus far - that's only like 25% of the pie. The remaining 75% of the pie has to do the at home viewing experience. Biggest issue is the duration .... not how many playoff teams. Duration of both season & games. Every game should be like a Mark Buehrle game. If you take the duration from 3hrs+ to 2hr 20mins you now have a product that is sustainable. Additionally if you're expanding playoffs then you need to shorten ST and Regular Season. 140 games and cut 10 games off ST. Each game counting for more = viewership. Finally the last part of this -- the MLB needs to learn how to market their star players better. Mike Trout is a pleasure to watch and I barely get to ... the MLB network does a great job each night covering games. Need more of that. Likewise these TV deals are a joke. The cubs are a great example this yaer. Dodgers in the past. The fact I need cable or streaming to watch the Sox is dumb. Let me pay $200 to watch the Sox for the year if I want - no blackouts. Where else in the world can you want to buy a product and not be able to? If i want a car - i go buy it. food go buy it. watch a movie? go buy it. Why is it so hard to pay to watch the Sox?

Wait - seriously - is this like one of these Twitter trolls or Peavy44 things? I don't usually pay attentino to who posts on this board - usually ... 85% of the time the conversation is strong enough where i just focus on teh response rather than the poster -- but this isn't serious right? You can find me where I said 100mph instead of 110mph. Thanks I'll hang up and listen. And also for real for real, my last post on this topic. I have too much actual work to do. It's all fun and games to waste 10 minutes of my day on here on topics.. going back and forth with a troll is a waste of time. I'm adding you to the block/mute list.

The Dennis Rodman era during the Bulls championship run must have been a real tough time. Give me a thousand Puigs over any scam artist like Jerry Reinsdorf or Ricketts. Those guys are 100 times worse than anything Puig has done in his life. I don't get why the moral police has come out on Puig.

I went to grab lunch and came back to this ..? yikes. I really dont even care about Puig much. Like 50/50. I'd give Scooter Gennett $5mm, then I'd give Puig $5mm and after that I'd just keep the team the same ... that's the order I'd do. He's not even my first choice of who I want left in FA. However outcries like yours don't make any sense to me. 22 years old.. 110mph. Not crazy to me. Second -- where do the goalposts move? Because you keep talking like i changed the speed limit to 100mph and got all bent out of shape about it. It's just another bizarre argument in an already bizarre argument. Dude -- you need to reread stuff.. You went off on a strange tangent about 100mph and how people are changing the argument and then adding in the mom part... just a very strange exchange in this thread that has nothing to do with baseball. Below is what i said ..... "Also not sure why 110mph in a 70mph zone is mind blowing to you. He was a 22 year old kid. I'm sure you've only gone the speed limit in your life. Hell i'll accidentally hit 90mph not paying attention on 55 when there's no traffic -- and that's in a shitty V6." This board sometimes .... it's more maddening than fun. My stance is Puig = better then pedestrian Leury or Engel. Worth upwards of $5mm for a season. Would rather have Scooter Gennett at same price. Also am okay going into the season as is, just think it's worth to add on. Now I'm going to go drive 111mph to my moms house to prove a point to myself that anyhting i do for the rest of my life is not worthy of anybodys praises and that i can not morally come back from it. I might as well drive right to prison and think of my transgressions.

This. And I'd add - I don't think Mazara should be automatically given the AB's. I'd go with the hot hand 4-5 days a week, the other at 2 days a week + filling in for Eloy or DH possibly. So one guy is getting 4 starts, the other 2-3.