Two-Gun Pete

1. Just a year ago, this same moronic FO decided that, instead of pursuing other FA QBs with better CVs, (ya know, like some guy named "brady"), OR waiting for Foles to be cut, and then sign him for the league minimum, that they should spend a draft pick for the right to pay him. They told us that they'd rather have Foles than the guy they drafted 2nd overall. On Glennon, they paid him MORE than Cutler was about to earn. And on Dalton, they negotiated against themselves to overpay him. Now, whether you or I think/thought that any of these piles of shit were LT solutions, this FO certainly behaved as though some of these guys would/could have been. 2. THIS was the guy they decided to sign to a $45MM contract. He was never "not terrible" at football. It is laughable that this guy still collects a paycheck now. It was laughable THEN that anyone could think that he could/should have been a starting QB. He sucked then, he sucks now. He was a bad choice by a bad front office, full stop. 3. By the time Foles was signed, I'd already shifted gears to "let's fire everyone" mode; but to your point, it was a moronic choice. 4. The loss of productive players for salary relief is a symptom of a stoopid FO led by a stoopid man. Failing to master the roster economics of the NFL, and to properly asset allocate is further proof of Pace's ineptitude. And that's setting aside that Fuller is what, top 5 at his position, while the dessicated remains of Jimmy Graham is "just a guy" at his? I cant disagree that I would have cut Graham and kept Fuller. But I also wouldn't have offered Dalton more than ~$5-6MM, given that NO OTHER TEAM was tied to him. Fuck, you just made me more irritated at this stoopid front office!

This. Exactly this. I hope he can keep this up against the big boy teams, and not just the AAAA teams like Detroit. I hope he can continue to throw strikes, and not walk the yard every 5th day. So far, this has been really his only "good start" of this season, and really, his 1st "good start," maybe going back to last August. More of this, please.

I cant disagree with any of this. I like Fields, and I believe that, in the RIGHT SITUATION, with competent coaching, and the RIGHT compliment of talent around him, and a competent front office, Fields can be a good NFL QB. I'm just not sure that this will occur here. There's still only 1 skill position player who would definitely start for another team. The O Line isn't as strong as others. The play calling has sucked. And the defense is aging. So, while we all look hopefully to his tenure here, we'll have to see how it goes. I have much more vitriol for front offices, who have months and years to decide what to do with their rosters, than I would ever have for an individual player. So, I don't blame Trubisky for sucking at football. I blame the stoopid GM for overpaying to overdraft him, then having a shitty bridge QB ahead of him, then rushing him into service before he might have been ready. I dont blame Leury for sucking at baseball. I blame the front office for not bothering to find a better player who can cromulently play multiple positions. Or building versatility into the roster. So yeah, I agree that we as Chicagoans have had to enjoy the fruits of stupidity for years.

Yeah. The other poster to whom I replied posted, "take a shot," not ,"drafted." (Shrugs) It isn't just "one QB drafted" that leads me to want regime change. Its the fact that they've been bad at their jobs for years, leading to bad teams each season. Leading to fall/winter sucking out loud for we the fans. I look forward to regime change, because this regime has been embarrassingly incompetent. I doubt that this move will work out, because every single one of the preceding QBs acquired has sucked out loud. Because Pace is a garden variety mediocrity. That said, as a fan I hope Fields beats the odds. As an aside, the NFL's front offices lag those of MLB and the NBA, in terms of being led by highly-educated and highly-qualified GMs and Team Presidents. Ryan Pace has a (snicker) marketing degree from EIU. (Im not meaning to impugn EIU, just that as a chief executive, he may not be as prepared as other with more schooling, IMO.) Which can help explain why stoopid decisions keep happening by his FO.

Ok, so just since Cutler, this GM took the following shots: 1. Was the only GM who believed that Mike Glennon was a starting-caliber QB (and paid him more than Cutler would have made), 2. Moronically took a shot at Trubksky, 3. Took a shot at giving up a draft pick, for the rights to overpay Nick Foles, 4. Overpaid for Dalton to the tune of $10MM (helping to fuck up the salary cap, & ushering Fuller out the door), 5. And now this with Fields. I'd say that they take plenty of shots at QB. They simply take stoopid shots at QB, because Pace is a stoopid human being. I dont mind this move, so much as I hate that a garden variety mediocrity like Pace gets chance after chance to prove how wrong he can be. If any of us were as bad at our jobs as Pace and Nagy are at theirs, we'd all be on fucking food stamps. Some of us would be in jail. That said, here's hoping Fields can beat the odds, and be a Pace-acquired QB that can be adequate at football. We'll have to see.

Ok, this is useful. We all want to be able to express ourselves, while respecting the house rules. Fair enough. I wouldn't wish someone harm, but I'm more than comfortable calling someone stupid, if they behave so. Well, I'll do my best. I dont like to post in the game threads. But for as stupid as this FO has behaved, it ain't always easy! ?

Sure, but as I read the initial post, calling a FO figure "a moron" could be construed as a personal attack. So, rather than a backhanded insult, I wanted to clarify. Fair? (And yes, I get that mods have a tough job.)

Understood. And I agree that there should be a line somewhere, based on "general fucking principle." I also think there should be enough room to critique organizational figures that richly deserve such treatments. Lastly, (and I FEAR this to be the case), of that earlier list, #2 is definitely true; #1 could be true (if the manager continues as he does), #3 COULD be true (without Robert and Jimenez, and with Hamilton as a starter), and #s 4-5 could be true, if this FO hasn't learned anything. I sincerely hope posters won't have a reason(s) to critique this FO/test this forum's mods.

I also agree with the overall sentiment of this threads as well. But I also agree that there appears to be a big grey area. Suppose that this FO does something that's impossibly stupid. Like, I dunno, fucking trading for James Shields-like figure, when the team: 1. Is in free fall in the standings, 2. Has a demonstrably-bad manager, 3. Has less talent than their competitors in the ALC, 4. The James Shields-like player is playing poorly, 5. And the James Shields-like figure isn't good enough (by himself) to get the team into the playoffs. Would it be acceptable to call the FO, "fucking stupid," or "morons," or to post something like, "Holy Fucking Shit, those morons should be fucking fired," or the like? I'm asking because such a statement, after such a move would be critical of the FO. I would also state that I think it would be fair to criticize the FO in this way. That is, if this FO ever did anything that dumb. Also, want to be clear about whats fair, and whats unfair, while not driving this towards WSI-like sacchariney-sweet FO water-carrying. Thanks in advance.

Sure. You clutched your pearls because "speeding tickets" or something. This year, with Darryl Boston already taking g up the "alleged sexual assaulter" role in the org, I felt that him being signed would be bad. That is, at least if/until the lawsuit was resolved. That said, Puig was (at one time) actually good at baseball. Mazara has always sucked. Did the SOX as an organization get demoted to the Southern League when I wasn't looking? Asking because a players MLB #s mean more at the, ya know, MLB LEVEL. After 4+ years in MLB, and his signing org giving up on him, I'd say that he probably wasn't good at MLB-caliber baseball. And guess what? The fine folks at fangraphs happen to agree.

Ok, so was Mazara ever good at baseball, yes or no?

Mccann: FA signing Muncy: FA signing Mercedes: rule 5 FA Turner: FA signing Big Papi: FA signing, then roids to artificially improve his performance. Randy Johnson: dunno what you're talking about here. Mazara: fWAR says he sucked his entire career. Other than being exactly wrong about all these "trades" you cited, your insistence to defend this move is noteworthy.

Look, Mazara has never ever produced >1 fWAR in a season. Which means he has ALWAYS sucked at baseball. Trading anything for a guy who has never ever produced >1 fWAR in a season is, by definition, stupid. He sucked, and it sucked to trade for a guy who sucks.

How could he have been a disappointment? Mazara has sucked out loud at baseball his entire career. IMO, he was exactly as shitty at baseball as he'd always been, and thus, he was exactly as expected. It was a disappointment that this FO were stupid enough to trade for a shitty DFA candidate like Mazara.

If it will be Cease vs. Dunning today, this thread will be like matter vs. antimatter.

OK, I need a ruling: Am I a bad guy for deriving some delicious schadenfreude from seeing @ssh0les like this get a measure of comeuppance?

Or, we could look at it as Lynn being unable to successfully go even 20 IP with the SOX without having to go on the IL. At a soon-to-be 34 years of age, and his body type, and his [lack of] dedication to keeping his body in shape over his career, I doubt that he'll get better at pitching, while getting healthier going forward. Given this, and the likely work stoppage in 2022, I don't know that I would want to extend Lynn, regardless of how he finishes 2021. I likewise agree that it was moronic to lead the offseason with the acquisition of a rental. I also agree that Lynn is/was good, and hope/pray that this IL stint isn't the start of more frequent vacations on the IL going forward. And I agree that non-strikeout pitchers are grossly underrated in today's game. [Which may have beeen a market inefficiency for a budget-conscious team to exploit.]

This. Exactly this. Equally bad [IMO] is/was that Lynn is old and fat, which makes it unlikely for him to fight off age-related regression and injury long enough to make sense to re-sign him. So, if 2021 was the year that they decided to go "All-In," and push in all their chips, it was dumb to back the Lynn acquisition with Cease as the #5, and no bench depth to get through injuries. Especially, given that LAD and SDP look to be flat-out more talented than the SOX. In other words, they punted on the longer-term by giving up 6 years of Dunning, while NOT doing enough this offseason to increase their margin for error in THIS season. That is, if 2021 is, in their view, "their year."

The short nature of the season, and the extremely reduced travel (especially for ALW division teams) makes that hard to gauge. Especially for relief pitchers, IMO. Would Hendriks have continued on that pace, or would he shit his pants later in the season, as he's done here? Who knows? We DO know that Oakland (based on the book Moneyball) does not stupidly squander resources on acquiring a closer. Yet, they seem to routinely have good ones. Given that Hendriks was about to be a FA, Oakland likely rode him like a rented mule in 2020, knowing that any overuse issues would be someone else's problems. At the same time, dumber FOs squander resources (high draft picks and FA dollars) on closers, when their teams have other needs.

Yes, we already know this. Hendriks has still only been above average for fWAR for closers once in his career. He has not regularly been above average over the course of his career, so one wonders if this was yet again this FO buying high on a FA.

Like Pvt Pyle, we as SOX fans have been living in a world of shit, as far as lineups go.

1. Hendriks has had fWAR that exceeded the league average for closers once in his career. The league average is ~1.8; he had 3.8 in 2019 in pitching-friendly Oakland in 2019. [I draw no conclusions about the anomalous 2020 season.] But we've seen this movie before where the SOX stoopidly acquire a closer from Oakland, only for that closer to immediately shit his pants and fuck over the SOX. I'm not convinced that Hendriks is a premier closer any more, or if he benefitted from having pitched in a pitcher's paradise in Oakland. I also don't know that he was the best use of funds, since we're a SP injury or SP bout of ineffectiveness away from having both Cease and Lopez walking the yard 2 days out of 5. There is/was some surplus inventory in the BP. There isn't much surplus in the rotation, IMO. 2. I don't/didn't view the budget decision as "Colome or Eaton," since they are differing components of the roster. Rather, I viewed it as: "Hendriks or Colome, PLUS another FA SP, PLUS a FA reliever, PLUS Cease unfucking himself in Charlotte, PLUS being able to play the service time or extension game with Crochet." Or, "Hendriks vs Colome, + extra money to blow at the TDL or waiver deadline." Regardless, Hendriks hasn't lived up to his obese contract thus far, and I didn't like the idea of using such a large portion of the budget on a closer. He certainly hasn't proven to be three times the pitcher that Colome is, regardless of how one rates Colome.

Far be it for me to come between you two in a lovers' quarrel. But, xFIP isn't park-adjusted, and has it's limitations insofar as HR/FB% being "normalized" to league average. For a pitcher like Colome, who has a career HR/FB% at 9.1%, his xFIP will always be higher than his FIP. Over his career, his xFIP has been > FIP to the tune of some ~0.5-ish, BECAUSE his HR/FB% is < the league average. Colome also doesn't miss bats as much as other closers, so he'll again be underrated in today's day and age, where strikeout pitchers are all the rage. More cogently, to the opinion that Hendriks is "far far far better reliever than Colome?" I'm not so sure. Perhaps "better," but "far far far better?" I think that could be a bit subjective. Maybe "far better," or "far far better," but then subtract the difference in contract size/length, so it goes back to "better?" I'm not so sure that a guy on the wrong side of 30, coming from an INSANELY pitching-friendly environment was what this team needed this past offseason. I'm not sure that buying a guy who had only 1 season of fWAR > the league average closer [a shortened 2020 aside] isn't "buying high." I'm not sure that a team that ALREADY HAD Heuer, Bummer, Crochet, Kopech, Foster, plus Fry and Burdi really NEEDED to blow their FA wad on a closer, when there are/were more pressing needs. I think that asking if "Hendriks is a better pitcher than Colome" isn't the right question to ask, when you're dealing with an org that has self-imposed salary restrictions. I think the better questions could have been: 1. Is Hendriks THREE TIMES the pitcher that Colome is, based on salary, AND YEARS? [If this is what Hendriks is today, what will he be in 3 years from now?!? ?] 2. Is the future closer already in-house, and at a lower salary? [BTW, did the 2005 SOX break camp with Jenks as the closer? Just askin'....] 3. Could we use the difference in Hendrik's salary/years and Colome's salary/years, and then asset allocate into another area of need? [Rotational depth, utility depth since this org doesn't believe in making versatile players, etc...] For my money, I would have preferred to commit less salary, and fewer years to Colome than what they ultimately paid to Hendriks. I would have preferred that, knowing that I've got PILES of young relievers in the org who might be able to get the closers' job done at a fraction of Hendrik's price/years. [And knowing that Colome's salary would not have handcuffed the org going forward.] I would have then bought another SP in FA, because I think that Cease has sucked out loud at baseball so far. Not because I'm "pining for Colome," so much as I thought/think that the money could have been invested more wisely in this roster.. YMMV, and please, carry on, you two.

Sure, we're all irritated that the (snicker) "Hall of Fame Baseball Person" can't get his shit sorted. Im equally irritated that this incompetent FO couldn't figure out how to make a more competent utility player than Leury. (Note how many exposures Mendick has to playing in the OF, then recognize why Leury is currently ahead of him in the depth chart.) But all that shit should have been worked out well before this season started; there ain't much that can be done about those things right now.. With Cease, he's mostly been a disaster since being called up, and sure, they could/should have gotten someone more competent than he this past offseason. But he's here now, and supposedly, Katz was supposed to "fix him." So, let's see it. Let's see him get his BB/9 low enough for him to contribute positive WAR to this team. Its all right in front of him to do.

Meh, I'm not all that worried about the lineup. This game, and this season rests largely on the ability for Cease to throw strikes, and consume innings, full stop. Its set up nicely for him today against this particular opponent. Here's your chance to rise above your heretofore career of mediocrity, Dylan. And heres hoping that Cease can deliver the goods today.