OmarComing25

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Nov 3, 2015 -> 02:53 PM) I'm liking the bullpen but would like to see us land a good lefty I'm excited for Jones and Robertson show next season Jennings was actually rock solid in the 2nd half of the season.

Regarding the Jar Jar theory: http://imgur.com/gallery/y8oTn Check out #9

http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/ Plinkett's Star War reviews, I rewatch them occasionally as they're hilarious. They're very long but definitely worth watching.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Nov 3, 2015 -> 09:35 AM) My plan would be to get a manager that can effectively manage the pen. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2015-mlb...ny-joe-girardi/ I've posted this before but Robin is actually decent at managing the pen.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 3, 2015 -> 06:26 AM) Quintana/Adams for....the steal deal of the century (love those 4-6 for 1-2 plans they come up with) mlbtraderumors Cubs get a solid pitcher in quintana and a potential stud in spencer who has a ways to go before making his MLB debut seeing as he’s only like 19 years old (at LEAST 2 years away…. more likely 3-4). Sox get the young position prospects they DESPERATELY need. They get a better SS in Castro over having to keep worse Alexei Ramirez…. regardless what Sox fans say. Castro’s down year this year is not too far off a typical Ramirez year. They also get a HR masher in Vogelbach who has superb plate discipline to play 1B/DH with Abreu. They get a solid hitting catching prospect in Zagunis. They get a gold glove in waiting in Almora who scouts say could hit about .280 or better and develop into a 20 HR hitter…… especially playing in US Cellular. And I’ll throw in pierce johnson as a toss in. Projects to be a 3-4 starter if he pans out. Cough up 1 ML pitcher and a pitching prospect for 4 players who could address almost all the Sox weaknesses on offense within 2 years. It at least gives you positional prospect hope. Looked at the top position prospects the Sox have listed on their website……. it’s pretty ugly. This hypothetical trade is more than fair imo. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/10/offs...hite-sox-6.html So we give up Quintana and Adams for a bunch of prospects that aren't even at the top of the Cubs' own system? The only one there I've heard good things about is Almora, and looking at his minor league stats they're far from impressive. No Torres, McKinney, or Contreras?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 2, 2015 -> 08:49 AM) Is that how Cubs fans look at this year? Sure, it took KC from post draft 2006 until 2013 to build a winner. Despite all the draft picks, they had limited payrolls and media rights in the bottom 2-3. The Rays, Twins, A's, Pirates and Rockies couldn't get it done from that small market group. The margin of error is smaller. Ten years for the Astros. Roughly the same for the Mets. Even less for the Northsiders. Isn't the point to build a team with a 3-5 year window that provides you a consistent opportunity to at least get an invitation to the dance and at least 2-3 legit chances for a ring? The White Sox have had seven going on eight years and not even sniffing .500 for the moment. So we weren't sniffing .500 for the last eight years? If you're giving KC nine years of under .500 baseball, then the Sox have at least 6 more seasons to get back to .500 if they want to follow in the same path.

Yeah these odds mean absolutely nothing, and the idea that the Royals would feel slighted by them is ridiculous.

The Royals scored 40 runs from the 8th inning on in the postseason. No other team scored more than 5. That's a crazy stat. Also, I doubt Murphy or Cespedes lost any free agent money from their World Series performances, no more than Murphy gained from his homerun streak, which was little to none.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:41 PM) And now they will win 90 games next year behind stellar offense and OK pitching as their bullpen implodes and they will miss the playoffs. If only the 2nd Wildcard was around in 2006...

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:29 PM) It seems odd that a team would have consecutive world series appearances these days. Phillies and Rangers did it very recently.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:25 PM) I wouldn't bet on that. Although I'd say the Royals have a better shot of making the 3rd world series than we do even making the playoffs You wouldn't bet against a single team not making the World Series? That's an easy bet to make, no matter who the team is.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:23 PM) I'm sure there's plenty of teams before 1980 that hit fewer than 139 homers. Giants hit fewer homeruns last year.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:20 PM) I wonder what the record for lowest total HRs for a WS winning team is. This KC team's gotta be there. I'm sure there's plenty of teams before 1980 that hit fewer than 139 homers.

Nothing against the Mets but I'm happy the AL is going to win it, clearly the superior league this year.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:08 PM) Particularly why I deleted the post. I agree with you, but I'm not going to doubt professional athletes who play the game either on their mentality. I just think experience is waaaay down on the list of why the Royals are winning this series.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:07 PM) Christian Colon...lmao Only AB in the playoffs too.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 10:59 PM) Sabermetrics taking over mind sets of players.. yikes. And agreed with Reed. It's not Sabremetrics, as many examples you can give of the more experienced team winning I can give you just as many examples of the inexperienced team winning. In '05 every team we faced in the playoffs was far more experienced than us, but we still kicked ass.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 10:46 PM) Tell that to the players and manager who have repeatedly said it before and during this series. They know what it takes now. Not just "being happy to be there." http://grantland.com/the-triangle/mlb-play...yths-to-ignore/ They can say whatever they want the numbers don't support them. The whole " knowing what it takes now" is such a BS narrative. There's no secret strategy to winning the World Series. You need to do the same things you do to win any other series.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 10:43 PM) Being in the World Series last year was so beneficial for the Royals. There's no correlation between experience and playoff success.

Mets have no one to blame but themselves. They've had the lead in the 8th inning in 4 of the 5 games. Just pathetic in closing out games.

QUOTE (coco1997 @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 11:11 AM) If the Cubs signed Gordon to play LF, wouldn't that just about seal Schwarber's fate? Does anyone really think he can stick as a catcher? I like that one proposal I read to trade Schwarber to Oakland for Sonny Gray. The A's get set at DH for the next decade, and the Cubs have an easy #1/2 under team control through 2020. That's a terrible trade for Oakland.

Is there data on guys who move to the DH spot without having prior experience there and then struggling? I'm not sure two data points is a sufficient sample size to make that kind of conclusion, especially since we acquired both guys well after their prime years anyway.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Oct 31, 2015 -> 11:28 PM) Oh come on. It changes nothing, really? So we're just going to go about assembling our team with second third tier FA and cast away FA's to compete against a DIVISIONAL opponent, twice in the World Series and likely to win it this season, even after Williams has acknowledged we're in our three year window? Point A to Point B changes when the Royals have more revenue from a World Series run to retain, sign, extend vital playera for their success. Unless you think the Royals have unlocked the secret to beating the variance in the postseason (and both years required massive f***-ups by the A's and Astros), yes it doesn't change much from the end of the season. Any team that makes the playoffs is capable of winning it all, the Royals aren't special here. They won the AL in the regular season, that says a lot more to me than the results of 3 series. But even ignoring playoff randomness, I'm not sure what your point is. Why would this change our plans? Do you really think Hahn was planning on sitting on his ass, but it's only after a division rival wins it all (assuming they get it done) that he cares about improving the team? That would be ridiculous. If anything, worrying about "answering" a title from a rival would just lead to desperation and risky moves that would set us back further. It won't and shouldn't make a difference, we already knew KC was good enough to win it all, them actually getting it done is irrelevant as far as we are concerned. The fact that the 2011-2014 Tigers never won it all didn't make them any less of a threat, they were still one of the best teams in the league regardless of playoff results. Do you really think the other NL West teams tried "harder" after the Giants' recent success? No, a rival doing well doesn't suddenly create new options to improve that didn't exist before.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2015 -> 10:47 PM) Yes, but it sets an even higher bar or standard. From Point A to B is a massive gulf, at least for the moment. And I disagree. The Royals set the standard by winning 95 games, them winning a few short playoff series that are each basically a toss-up doesn't change anything. If the Astros had held on to their 4-run lead in Game 4 of the ALDS, the distance from Point A to Point B would be exactly the same. This changes nothing.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Oct 31, 2015 -> 10:20 PM) Go Royals! I can't wait for Hahn to assemble a team to compete with the World Series champions... Whether or not the Royals close this out won't affect Hahn's plans at all.