Jump to content

Draft Kings sets Sox O/U at 49.5 wins


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Your post is obviously putting a negative spin on such a reaction.

That's true I guess. People would much prefer to go the easy route and be negative instead of looking at the changes made and choose to give the new people a chance.

I guess I just don't understand why the lack of objectivity and having open minds.

Edited by ptatc
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ptatc said:

That's true I guess. People would much prefer to go the easy route and be negative instead of looking at the changes made and choose to give the new people a chance.

I guess I just don't umderstand why the lack of objectivity and having open minds.

Easier, still, to pretend that a 3rd party is controlling their own actions, a team owner forces them to dump on any comment, like a slap in the face, over and over. 

It's always weird how those who get mad for being called out for constant negativity don't accept that a bad team owner has made the generally positive person push back on them. Bad owners are only to blame for their own aggressive actions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Nah as much as I appreciate you Lip I'll be fine with a 15 game improvement in 2025 and 1 year closer to what you think will happen ( which is the most likely scenario).

No worries, I appreciate your posts since you obviously take a lot of time thinking them through. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestEddy said:

We just saw a full house-cleaning, but sure, let's do that every 3 years, regardless. 

I guess I missed new ownership walking in the door and the hiring of a new G.M. not connected in any way shape or form to the old ownership to say nothing of the issues being caused by the V/P of marketing who from what everyone has told me who is connected with the organization has made head scratching moves that has cost the franchise millions of dollars. 

What the Sox have done may result (notice I said may) in a modest improvement but JR still has 51% of the vote. That means a backward thinking approach to the minor leagues, self imposed limits on acquisition of talent by any and all means and an unwillingness to take any risks.

Until that changes this franchise will continue to be incompetent, dysfunctional and inept.  

We have not, repeat not, seen a full house cleaning. 

Edited by Lip Man 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WestEddy said:

That's the guy who thinks the White Sox only have 3 pitching prospects in the minors. It doesn't take much effort to see that the 2025 White Sox could be a replacement level team and win 50 games. But they won't let themselves say it. 

Yeah aren’t you the guy who included Shane Drohan as one of our legit pitching prospects in that same discussion lol. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Explaining why isn't going to change your mind. It might just be the difference between optimism and pessimism. You can't be a coach or player with a defeatist attitude .I'd like to think there will be great progress among many of the pitchers and some of the hitters.

This is a message board, I’m interested in seeing why he thought this team would win 50  or more games. I wasn’t looking for someone to “change my mind”. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ptatc said:

That's true I guess. People would much prefer to go the easy route and be negative instead of looking at the changes made and choose to give the new people a chance.

I guess I just don't understand why the lack of objectivity and having open minds.

Objectivity is a misnomer here.  We have history to base observations and expectations on, and do not need blind faith.  There is nothing to say that the happy people are any more objective that the upset ones, just because you agree with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Objectivity is a misnomer here.  We have history to base observations and expectations on, and do not need blind faith.  There is nothing to say that the happy people are any more objective that the upset ones, just because you agree with them.

I disagree with pretty much all of this. No one is taking the extreme and having blind faith.

Objectivity means taking a look at all sides. Not just sticking to one view all the time. This may be a foreign concepts to many. 

All I said is I don't understand the negativity of not giving someone a chance. I didn't take a side or agree with anyone. I didn't say are going to win the world series and we should all believe they will do well.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ptatc said:

This is unfortunately true. Objective reporting is dead  its just a certain narrative and people's spin.

Watch an interview today compared to 10 years ago. Hosts of shows interrupt their guests, scream at their guests if they don't agree with the popular narrative. My take is Soros got to 'em. Just my take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I disagree with pretty much all of this. No one is taking the extreme and having blind faith.

Objectivity means taking a look at all sides. Not just sticking to one view all the time. This may be a foreign concepts to many. 

All I said is I don't understand the negativity of not giving someone a chance. I didn't take a side or agree with anyone. I didn't say are going to win the world series and we should all believe they will do well.

 

 

And refusing to look at the Sox history and looking only for positives is by definition not objective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

And refusing to look at the Sox history and looking only for positives is by definition not objective. 

This is wrong as it's a new front office and they've created new positions and a structure that they've never had before.

No one knows if it will work but there isn't information to make a decision either way.

Edited by ptatc
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, ptatc said:

This is wrong as it's a new front office and they've created new positions and a structure that they've never had before.

No one knows if it will work but there isn't information to make a decision either way.

It's the same owner.  And we have done this before.  Many times.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said:

We have? I always thought the argument was that Jerry is too loyal and never changes anything. 

He is far to loyal and only changes things when he is basically left with no other choice. The White Sox react...they aren't an organization that is ahead of the curve.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said:

We have? I always thought the argument was that Jerry is too loyal and never changes anything. 

Who was Jerry’s immediate choice for new GM after admitting that he did not interview anyone else outside of the organization, or anyone else period?

Edited by WhiteSox2023
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...