OmarComing25

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Oct 16, 2015 -> 08:36 AM) Not really. Robin can't platoon nor use pinch hitting properly. Thus flawed players who have one excellent aspect of their game ( while weak at something else) are of little use. he doesn't use personnel well. And how should he have used his personnel this season? It's not like he had a bounty of options. Beckham and Bonaficio completely stunk up the joint at the plate. I think he utilized Shuck/Soto pretty well, and when Saladino came up he stopped using Conor as he should have. Only issue was maybe taking too long to pull the plug on LaRoche, but it's not like there were a lot of better options and it wasn't necessarily a bad idea to see if he could turn it around.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 10:35 PM) Pick LCS winners and MVPs Royals in 7. Hosmer Cubs in 5. Rizzo You said the other day that if the Blue Jays beat the Rangers they were your WS pick, what changed your mind? As for my picks, I'll go Toronto in 6, Mets in 7. Mets led the NL in runs scored after the ASB, and I think DeGrom/Thor/Harvey/Matz is better than Arrieta/Lester/Hendricks/Hammel. I know the regular season head-to-head record, but both the Mets and Cubs are completely different teams since then, so it's pretty meaningless. Hell, the White Sox won the season series against the Jays, but we never played them post-Price/Tulo acquisitions when they were the best team in baseball.

It's obvious his post is sarcasm.

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 10:35 PM) I think a good team, a good organization has both. A good manager with a good support staff AND good players. At this point in time, in my opinion, the Sox have a poor manager, at best mediocre help for coaches and very, very little talent. The talent they do have in some areas is very good but it's simply not enough. This is a top heavy team in the sense that you have maybe 6-8 pretty good players who could make just about every MLB team...but the rest of the roster is borderline at best. Many (most?) of them wouldn't even be on the bench for a playoff team. This isn't one or the other in my book. You need both areas to win. Mark The point is, replacing Robin should be last on the list of priorities. Pretty much every other need is more pressing.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 09:07 PM) I think the only reason this board believes that managers don't matter at all is because the team we love has in fact a manager that can't really manage. Joe Madden is way better than Robin it is not even close. No one disagrees that Maddon is a better manager, we're just saying it wouldn't move the needle that much if we don't get better players.

QUOTE (Soxfan90 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 09:26 PM) Both the Dodgers and the Mets aren't too impressive. Cubs are going to beat whoever they play the in NLCS. Not sure why you think they're unimpressive (aside from Wood/Anderson), both the Dodgers and Mets have looked 10 times better than the Cardinals looked.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 07:54 PM) LOL - well the next time I start a thread about choosing a new team will be my first, but hey! Don't let facts get in the way of you whining about something you can't argue against. In the meantime, why don't you go start your own thread about how you are going to choose a new team, and let us know how that works out for you. And thanks for proving the point that so many of the rest of us have made about what really defines an exciting season. If you are going to put seasons like 2006, 2010, 2003, and 2004 on par with the excitement that's going on now as we speak with the teams in the playoffs, well, I don't know what to tell you. Next thing you'll be citing the various "fun" winning streaks we've had throughout the years, too. Woo hoo! Meanwhile, I wonder how many Cardinals, or Yankees, or Giants, or Braves fans, etc, when asked to name their exciting seasons, have to settle for naming seasons that they failed to make the playoffs in. I can understand why you would, given the dearth of playoff action in these past 35 years of Reinsdorf's failure as owner of the White Sox. Point taken but I don't like the implication that all non-playoff seasons are the same. 2006, 2010, 2003, 2004, and 2012 are still >>>>>>>>> 2007, 2013, and 2014 in terms of excitement.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 07:38 PM) Arietta not starting game one even though it would be his regular rest. Makes you think he might be having some shoulder or elbow issues. It's the same deal with Price though. Not sure it means anything. EDIT: Just realized Price pitched on Monday, not Sunday. So it wouldn't be his regular rest. But it wouldn't be surprising if Arrieta needs a little extra rest, considering he's already pitched 70+ more innings than he ever has before in a season (I'm including his minor league innings last year).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 03:18 PM) But the question included, you know you weren't going to win. I understand multiple playoff appearances. I get that, but if you get swept out of the first round, or you're like the Pirates and make it 3 times in a row but lose 3-2 the first time and the 2 WC games the next time, isn't a title and a 90 win, and 85 win and 88 win season with no playoffs, and another playoff appearance bowing out in 4 games, far better? I think the whiners have taken over and pretty much are starting to brainwash everyone into think the White Sox have lost 100 games a year the last decade. They have had 4 or 5 decent seasons. Sure, the past 3 have been difficult, but they seem to be on a better track. A lot of stuff went wrong this past year. I love that they aren't blaming the manager. Blaming players is the fastest way to get things to change. That's why I'm on the fence with the Sox/Tigers. Also, I agree with you in your second paragraph. People act like the White Sox have been utterly terrible for the last decade, but from 2006-2012 we were usually pretty competitive. The last 3 seasons have created the perception that things have been this bad for a long time, when that just isn't true.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 03:01 PM) Honestly, I think I go for the multiple playoff appearances. Its more fun when your team is relevant. Yes, I like to win, but I also enjoy baseball and to have just one season that I enjoyed a lot and then 8 crappy ones or 7 or 8 seasons that I enjoyed (maybe not as much as that one), we'll I'll go quantity over quality in this case. Now no one ever knows that, but if you asked me as a fan, I'd always say give me multiple playoff chances (because I think the post-season is a crapshoot anyway). I'm inclined to agree, I think people overrate titles, especially in a sport as random as baseball. The Tigers/White Sox question is a good one, and since we've been so starved for baseball championships in this city people would lean towards the title, but in most cases I'd lean towards the Tigers here. For another example, in my opinion the Braves making the playoffs 14 years in a row and only having 1 title to show for it >>>>>>>> Marlins winning 2 titles randomly and sucking the rest of the time.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 02:45 PM) Aha, so it's Maddon's "making changes with his lineup" that causes them to succeed. Having the game's #1 prospect (Bryant) and 3 more of the top 15 or so position prospects isn't particularly relevant. Maddon would be having the same success with Cubs prospects like Brett Jackson and Josh Vitters. That's how good Maddon's lineup changes are. Great post.

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 01:01 PM) I'm assuming you just cloud your judgement with blind fanaticism. I suggest you get over the Cubs. There is no comp to a team that gets the the LCS with an average player age of under 25 years old. The George Bret Royals, the Big Red machine of the 1970s come close, but they were significantly older on average. The Cubs are going to be good for a long time. For your own mental and emotional faculties, I suggest you get over it real quick. The Cubs are very young on the position player side, but with pitching they'll be mostly relying on guys on the wrong side of 30. http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/2015-star...dl-projections/ According to this article there's about a 40% chance that any random pitcher will get injured in a given year, and the percentage is higher for older pitchers. After 2003 the Cubs had a young core of Prior/Wood/Zambrano/Dempster/Ramirez/Lee/Barrett/Patterson. It's a good bet that the Cubs will be pretty good for a while but to just automatically assume it could wind up with you losing your house like greg (sorry greg, but that's easily my favorite recurring theme on this board ). Guys get injured, young players regress, things don't go as expected. Schwarber could end up another Josh Fields. Lester/Arrieta could blow out their shoulders. There's a reason baseball is the hardest sport to predict.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:59 PM) 2 draft picks minus 1 draft pick (that we'll get from Shark QO) = 1 draft pick Good point, hadn't thought about it that way. The QO pick will also be higher in the draft than the two picks we lost.

QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 01:01 PM) I'm assuming you just cloud your judgement with blind fanaticism. I suggest you get over the Cubs. There is no comp to a team that gets the the LCS with an average player age of under 25 years old. The George Bret Royals, the Big Red machine of the 1970s come close, but they were significantly older on average. The Cubs are going to be good for a long time. For your own mental and emotional faculties, I suggest you get over it real quick. Average age of the Cubs: 28.3, they are actually the 11th oldest team in the MLB this year. If the Mets win tonight they'll be younger, with an average age of 27.9. The Sox are actually the 9th youngest team in the MLB, at 27.7.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:42 PM) We have been about as good as possible when it comes to health and our starters. When our best player is Chris Sale, that matters a lot. Keep Cooper around as long as possible, even if that's the only reason (it isn't). Also, there's a good chance Sale never becomes an ace under another team's guidance.

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:09 PM) I personally never understood why Coop is regarded as one of the best pitching coaches in the game. Did he have his fair share of reclamation successes? (Thornton, Putnam, etc) Yes. Have pitchers struggled under his guidance? (Samardzija, Danks, Downs, Belisario) Yes. I don't see the love for him personally. Since Cooper became the White Sox pitching coach in 2002 the Sox are 3rd in the MLB in pitching WAR (1st in SP WAR), only behind the Dodgers and Yankees (who both have a slim margin over us).

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:09 PM) You said before that Arrieta is having a once-in-a-generation year. Look at his 2014 stats on fangraphs. He was just as good, although he only had 25 starts (check WAR per start). Predicting injuries is meaningless, why even say anything? Dexter Fowler is a 110 wRC+ hitter at this point - very replaceable. Fangraphs says Arrieta is outperforming his FIP by a significant margin. He's obviously very, very good but it's just highly unlikely he'll put up another season with an ERA well under 2. Same deal with Greinke.

QUOTE (MindGame2004 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 11:22 AM) Tim Anderson's K to BB rate for AA is alarming when you project him to the Majors. I know he's new to baseball, and the Sox like those type of toolsy athlete types, but I have reservations as to Anderson being all he can be in the Majors. 114 K to 24 walks. 125 games played. He doesn't have the power to hit like that either. If they trade him, what would they get back is the real question. Look at his month by month splits. His K to BB rate after April and May was significantly better. Still has a lot of work to do but he's still pretty young, raw, and has shown improvement.

If we hadn't taken a shot this past offseason and made 2015 a rebuilding year instead, then 2016 probably wasn't going to have high expectations either. The only move that could potentially really hamper us past 2016 was Melky and that's just for 2017. Other than that it's the two draft picks and Semien (who would be nice to have right now). At least we didn't gut a top farm system and hamper ourselves with horrible contracts like the Padres did.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 11:51 AM) I just think that they will crash down to earth especially Arrieta. Arrieta is arbitration eligible after this season and is going to cost a ton of money. He screams TJ surgery in spring training to me. Fowler will be gone via free agency. Everything has gone right. I wouldn't be surprised to see them only win upper 86-90 games next season (Arrieta's ERA regresses to high 2s, Bryant can't sustain his super high BABIP, sophomore slumps, etc.), but 80 would mean absolutely everything went wrong, especially if they pick up a top SP in the offseason.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jose-ba...lue-jays-101415

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 14, 2015 -> 08:20 PM) Looking at the lineups of the playoff teams it's a gut punch of how far we have to go. We have a bunch of players that we say "well they'd be good enough for that position", but that's what you say when you have 4-5 star players to offset the "good enough". You can't have good enough at every position! On the bright side our playoff trio of Sale/Q/Rodon would easily best any of the other AL playoff rotations, and is at least on par if not better than the NL playoff rotations.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 14, 2015 -> 09:08 PM) I was referring to pre-steroids Bonds. Well, never mind. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/the-cubs-are-...-032206186.html It's starting. Passan basically arguing that the Cubs in the NLCS and World Series will be one of the first times in recent history baseball has gotten more attention in October than football, probably going back to the 2004 Red Sox championship...oxygen remaining for the White Sox in the media, critical and failing. Despite the playoff series win the sports radio talk this week so far has been mostly about the Bears.

Toronto in 6, Royals have suspect pitching.

The manager isn't meaningless but his importance is always vastly overstated. The Rays won more games this year than last year and that was with largely the same roster sans Price and Maddon and being decimated by injuries. There's not a lot of evidence that managers matter all that much. Scapegoats and undeserved accolades pretty much describe the majority of managers (especially Maddon this year). The Cubs' rookies didn't play well because Maddon managed them to play well.