WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 3:39 PM, southsider2k5 said: I do pretend to understand that if we wanted cheap mediocre relievers we could just as easily spend non-prospect resources on them in the free agent market instead of giving up on what we supposedly do so well instead. Are you going to pretend that our trades aren't flat out contradicting what our chorus line of press is saying about how great we do at this very activity? Why is the only way we can find any relievers by trading for them with the very pitching prospects we are supposed to be so good at developing? Expand Okay, you're not going to answer my question. Money is a resource they don't seem to want to dole out on relief arms at $5-$7M a clip. You will argue that our minor league system is lacking in everything, yet, we don't have a rookie ball arm/low-A bullpen arm to spare to create a bevy of major league bullpen arms to avoid last year's catastrophe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 3:59 PM, WestEddy said: Okay, you're not going to answer my question. Money is a resource they don't seem to want to dole out on relief arms at $5-$7M a clip. You will argue that our minor league system is lacking in everything, yet, we don't have a rookie ball arm/low-A bullpen arm to spare to create a bevy of major league bullpen arms to avoid last year's catastrophe. Expand None of the arms we got are $5 to $7 million arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:02 PM, southsider2k5 said: None of the arms we got are $5 to $7 million arms. Expand And most importantly why are we giving up future pieces that actually fit the type of timeline a 121 win team would be on, for arms that will be dead and buried by the time we could actually use back end type bullpen arms to matter in middle relief? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 2:59 PM, Bob Sacamano said: My 2 cents: he's a bad GM who is unqualified for the position who wouldn't be placed in this situation to fail if not for the owner. Don't really care to argue since it is what it is at this point until something changes at the very top. Expand Do any of the hires he's made change your mind as well? I've said a million times that I wasn't a fan of the Chris Getz hire it's not the hire I would've made. I'm pretty impressed with the majority of hires he's made to reshape the organization similarly to how an outsider would though. On 2/10/2025 at 3:05 PM, southsider2k5 said: I can't help but note that for a system that has such faith in its player development and specifically pitching development, they sure are trading off a lot of young pitchers to get middle aged and very limited ceiling middle aged pitchers to replace them. If this is supposed to be the lodestar of Sox player development, why are we sending future out for guys we should be able to easily replicate in our system? I mean even if we were getting hitters for them, it might be something, but old middle relievers? Make it make sense for me. Expand I'm guessing that the Sox feel like Tyler Gilbert and Cam Booser types will bring them back more at the deadline than what they traded to acquire them. The Sox got an actual prospect for Tanner Banks at last year's deadline. I think it's just a similar gamble to try and create value. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 3:48 PM, GreenSox said: It was a top 100 prospect short. The two low-minors guys were essentially the return for Kopech. I've said it before, but it seems to me that Getz makes these trades on the other teams' terms and he trusts these GMs for some reason. If your own pro scouting department is competent and properly deployed, you should never be in the position to have to trust these GMs. It's particularly annoying in the Fedde trade given that there was really no urgent need to trade him in first place. And yet, Getz basically did what Mozeliak and Gomes/Friedman wanted him to do. Even the Crochet trade was on the Red Sox terms, as they held back their top 3 guys; that should work out for the Sox in this one case because their next prospects were players about which the Sox had independent knowledge. But overall, he's trying to build this org from absolute ground zero. He just can't afford big gaffes like this, especially as they haven't been much better than C-level performers in the other modes of talent acquisition: the Draft and International signings. Expand And nobody traded a top 100 prospect at last year's deadline. Are you saying they should have held onto Fedde and Kopech, and waited for a better market for pitchers in the off-season? Perhaps the pro scouting department wasn't competent, and that's why they replaced most of it after last season. Yes, it's irritating that Getz seems to have been spun around on the Fedde trade and got short-changed. There's no reason to cram the Crochet trade into that framing, and pretend he got hosed on that one, too. Please notify me when somebody trades a starting pitcher for THREE TOP FIFTEEN (in the game) PROSPECTS!!! The dynamics of prospects have shifted, and nobody is trading those guys. So if you're going to expect a GM to do what nobody else in the game is able to do, then you're going to be regularly disappointed. The Crochet trade was not a gaffe. It was a very good trade that even the guys here who pretend that every roster move is catastrophic and damning have acknowledged it was a good return. The Fedde trade was a prospect light. The jury's still out on Vargas. Kopech was a head case who had 2 good outings before the trade where he actually started listening to his coaches. There aren't even any WE COULDA HAD KEASCHALL rumors for Kopech. Could Getz have gotten more? Sure. Kopech didn't help him. I agree that Getz has to avoid gaffes like the Fedde return. That trade seemed forced. The Crochet trade was a good, old-fashioned haul any fanbase should be proud of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 10 Author Share Posted February 10 (edited) On 2/10/2025 at 4:07 PM, Y2Jimmy0 said: Do any of the hires he's made change your mind as well? I've said a million times that I wasn't a fan of the Chris Getz hire it's not the hire I would've made. I'm pretty impressed with the majority of hires he's made to reshape the organization similarly to how an outsider would though. I'm guessing that the Sox feel like Tyler Gilbert and Cam Booser types will bring them back more at the deadline than what they traded to acquire them. The Sox got an actual prospect for Tanner Banks at last year's deadline. I think it's just a similar gamble to try and create value. Expand With results I can change my mind for sure. It is encouraging to see some of the hires of though. I've just grown so numb to this team. Edited February 10 by Bob Sacamano 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:12 PM, WestEddy said: And nobody traded a top 100 prospect at last year's deadline. Are you saying they should have held onto Fedde and Kopech, and waited for a better market for pitchers in the off-season? Perhaps the pro scouting department wasn't competent, and that's why they replaced most of it after last season. Yes, it's irritating that Getz seems to have been spun around on the Fedde trade and got short-changed. There's no reason to cram the Crochet trade into that framing, and pretend he got hosed on that one, too. Please notify me when somebody trades a starting pitcher for THREE TOP FIFTEEN (in the game) PROSPECTS!!! The dynamics of prospects have shifted, and nobody is trading those guys. So if you're going to expect a GM to do what nobody else in the game is able to do, then you're going to be regularly disappointed. The Crochet trade was not a gaffe. It was a very good trade that even the guys here who pretend that every roster move is catastrophic and damning have acknowledged it was a good return. The Fedde trade was a prospect light. The jury's still out on Vargas. Kopech was a head case who had 2 good outings before the trade where he actually started listening to his coaches. There aren't even any WE COULDA HAD KEASCHALL rumors for Kopech. Could Getz have gotten more? Sure. Kopech didn't help him. I agree that Getz has to avoid gaffes like the Fedde return. That trade seemed forced. The Crochet trade was a good, old-fashioned haul any fanbase should be proud of. Expand I think what most said about the Fedde trade was get the most for him. If that's in the division, so what? But apparently, Getz doesn't want to give a pitcher to a team 45 games better than the White Sox with a year left on his deal. Might haunt him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:05 PM, southsider2k5 said: And most importantly why are we giving up future pieces that actually fit the type of timeline a 121 win team would be on, for arms that will be dead and buried by the time we could actually use back end type bullpen arms to matter in middle relief? Expand Because "future pieces" are the only commodity we have a glut of. You can continue to complain that the Sox won't go out and start assembling a $100M bullpen. It's not going to happen right now. You claim this team is about 4-5 years off from being competitive. Do you actually believe we should be signing bullpen arms to long term deals who will be around in 5-8 years? That's sillly. and Of course Cam Booser and Tyler Gilbert shouldn't be getting paid $5-7M. They're pre-arb, for heaven's sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:15 PM, Dick Allen said: I think what most said about the Fedde trade was get the most for him. If that's in the division, so what? But apparently, Getz doesn't want to give a pitcher to a team 45 games better than the White Sox with a year left on his deal. Might haunt him. Expand That's what the Twins' beat reporter conveyed after he delivered an incomplete report on a trade rumor. Again, we have no idea how far along any trade talk between the teams went. You can pretend that Getz turned down a top 100 prospect for Fedde, if you want. Nobody outside those with a narrative to flog reference that rumor like there was any legs to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:20 PM, WestEddy said: Because "future pieces" are the only commodity we have a glut of. You can continue to complain that the Sox won't go out and start assembling a $100M bullpen. It's not going to happen right now. You claim this team is about 4-5 years off from being competitive. Do you actually believe we should be signing bullpen arms to long term deals who will be around in 5-8 years? That's sillly. and Of course Cam Booser and Tyler Gilbert shouldn't be getting paid $5-7M. They're pre-arb, for heaven's sake. Expand Literally none of what I said, is accurately reflected here. This entire post is made up for you to create an argument that wasn't there and attempt to knock down. There are plenty of mediocre middle relievers out there who the Sox could populate this roster with, and would not require the movement of their own young talent, nor $5 to $7 million dollars a season (which is your made up number, not mine). The Sox have already brought in back end guys in the million to two million dollar range who will fill innings just as well as a Steven Wilson did last year, and cost us nothing for the future. The results out of the 2025 bullpen literally do not matter. The foundation of this organization is a 121 win team. Any effort to win games in 2025 is inherently wasted, and any resources given up to do it are giving up potential bullets for the timeline where we might actually have a chance to do something. If we want to trade young talent for middle relievers in 4-5 years, because we have a team where the 5th and 6th innings actually matter, do it then, like a normal organization. If the current mantra that we have this amazing group of pitchers whispers from development all of the way up to the major league level is actually true, we should not even need to waste resources trading for these guys in the future, because this amazing development program should be turning them out from guys just like Combs and Fajardo. The theory being not that every guy hits, but if you collect a critical mass of those types of players into your amazing system, you can turn enough of them into major leaguers that the failures don't matter because they are overwhelmed by your successes. We should be in a mass talent collection phase with a focus on guys who will be on a major league roster in 2030, not 2025. In fact in the short Getz era, we have seen the opposite, where it seems to be the guys who we dump who have higher rates of success after leaving the Sox organization versus the ones who we either bring in from the outside, or promote from the inside, are having within the Sox organization. The fact that we are already quickly dumping Getz recent draft picks, and recent trade acquisitions looks like a red flag that already questioning their own work and processes enough to dump these guys for incredibly low ceiling and older middle relievers. Their actions and their words do not flow in the same direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 (edited) On 2/10/2025 at 4:23 PM, WestEddy said: That's what the Twins' beat reporter conveyed after he delivered an incomplete report on a trade rumor. Again, we have no idea how far along any trade talk between the teams went. You can pretend that Getz turned down a top 100 prospect for Fedde, if you want. Nobody outside those with a narrative to flog reference that rumor like there was any legs to it. Expand The beat writer with sources obviously knows less than you;. Just read this. It's when Getz was the Minor League guy. Tells you all you need to know about his evaluation skills. https://www.mlb.com/news/white-sox-project-birmingham-program Edited February 10 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:32 AM, WestEddy said: I see publications online giving him a solid B for the Crochet trade and the signings he's made. The rest of the world doesn't live in "I hate Chris Getz" land. They actually make objecting observations. Expand Unlike the poster arguing that Getz deserves no blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:36 PM, southsider2k5 said: Literally none of what I said, is accurately reflected here. This entire post is made up for you to create an argument that wasn't there and attempt to knock down. There are plenty of mediocre middle relievers out there who the Sox could populate this roster with, and would not require the movement of their own young talent, nor $5 to $7 million dollars a season (which is your made up number, not mine). The Sox have already brought in back end guys in the million to two million dollar range who will fill innings just as well as a Steven Wilson did last year, and cost us nothing for the future. The results out of the 2025 bullpen literally do not matter. The foundation of this organization is a 121 win team. Any effort to win games in 2025 is inherently wasted, and any resources given up to do it are giving up potential bullets for the timeline where we might actually have a chance to do something. If we want to trade young talent for middle relievers in 4-5 years, because we have a team where the 5th and 6th innings actually matter, do it then, like a normal organization. If the current mantra that we have this amazing group of pitchers whispers from development all of the way up to the major league level is actually true, we should not even need to waste resources trading for these guys in the future, because this amazing development program should be turning them out from guys just like Combs and Fajardo. The theory being not that every guy hits, but if you collect a critical mass of those types of players into your amazing system, you can turn enough of them into major leaguers that the failures don't matter because they are overwhelmed by your successes. We should be in a mass talent collection phase with a focus on guys who will be on a major league roster in 2030, not 2025. In fact in the short Getz era, we have seen the opposite, where it seems to be the guys who we dump who have higher rates of success after leaving the Sox organization versus the ones who we either bring in from the outside, or promote from the inside, are having within the Sox organization. The fact that we are already quickly dumping Getz recent draft picks, and recent trade acquisitions looks like a red flag that already questioning their own work and processes enough to dump these guys for incredibly low ceiling and older middle relievers. Their actions and their words do not flow in the same direction. Expand If winning games in 2025 isn't important, then I look forward to you never referencing 121 losses again. I'm being constantly beaten over the head with "121 losses", like it's killing the fanbase, and when children still pay attention, it causes all sorts of anxiety disorders, denying families bonding opportunities, and it's this cloud of shame I should feel the weight of. Winning games 42-60 matters or it doesn't. If it does, then shoring up the bullpen and creating depth is key to that. If Getz can create value by trading a marginal guy who was able to strike out 16-year-old kids learning the game in a distant land, then parlaying that into a better prospect in July, all the better. And why do you keep saying 121 wins? Is that auto-correct, or are you setting the bar for this team to break the single season win record by 5 games? Can you explain how having 6+ starters to find innings for in Kannapolis translates to having a full major league bullpen? Surely you're not suggesting rushing guys like Fajardo and Combs up to the majors. And relying on guys like Bush and Iriarte to step into the bullpen is what left us with a group of 1.4 WHIP set-up throwers last year. Pick a lane. Either you want Getz to build a team that valiantly wins 60 games, or you want him to complete forsake the big club in the service of filling the minor leagues with every body who doesn't run fast enough to get away. Last year's bullpen was a catastrophe. Layer Grifol's misuse with an historic cloud of bad luck that was so distracting and demoralizing, reliable vets were playing like panicked rookies. (There, I used your mantra. Are you happy?) So yeah, a veteran arm like Tim Hill (who the hoi polloi screamed sucked and didn't even deserve major league innings in the first place) sucked here, then went to a more stable environment, and realized his potential. Trading an 8th round draft pick is not "dumping" them. You also mention "recent draft pickS" with a plural "S". I can count one "recent" draft pick Getz traded out of the last 4 drafts. Are there any other draft picks he's traded ill-advisedly I don't know about? One guy seems to turn into "multiple" with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:07 PM, Y2Jimmy0 said: Do any of the hires he's made change your mind as well? I've said a million times that I wasn't a fan of the Chris Getz hire it's not the hire I would've made. I'm pretty impressed with the majority of hires he's made to reshape the organization similarly to how an outsider would though. I'm guessing that the Sox feel like Tyler Gilbert and Cam Booser types will bring them back more at the deadline than what they traded to acquire them. The Sox got an actual prospect for Tanner Banks at last year's deadline. I think it's just a similar gamble to try and create value. Expand How do you feel about the Gene Watson hire? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:43 PM, Dick Allen said: The beat writer with sources obviously knows less than you;. Expand He doesn't seem to know as much as our own insiders. Or he did, and he held that little tidbit back to maintain "access". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 4:54 PM, Tnetennba said: Unlike the poster arguing that Getz deserves no blame. Expand Give an inch, get an inch. If somebody's going to pretend that trading Matt Thompson and passing on signing Michael A. Taylor were catastrophic moves that portend a complete collapse of civilized society, then no, I won't be joining in the chorus calling for senseless firings of guys who were just hired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 Getz may have made some new hires that look good on paper. But it is too soon to know whether those hires actually can fix past organizational failings. Or if they will be allowed to. Those hires, however, do not overshadow Getz's management of the 40 man roster, which to this point borders on catastrophic. Chris Getz is the architect of the worst baseball team in the modern history of the sport, and one good trade does not make up for burning limited trade capital with very little to show for the return and burning millions of dollars in limited payroll on a 121 loss team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:15 PM, WestEddy said: If winning games in 2025 isn't important, then I look forward to you never referencing 121 losses again. I'm being constantly beaten over the head with "121 losses", like it's killing the fanbase, and when children still pay attention, it causes all sorts of anxiety disorders, denying families bonding opportunities, and it's this cloud of shame I should feel the weight of. Winning games 42-60 matters or it doesn't. If it does, then shoring up the bullpen and creating depth is key to that. If Getz can create value by trading a marginal guy who was able to strike out 16-year-old kids learning the game in a distant land, then parlaying that into a better prospect in July, all the better. And why do you keep saying 121 wins? Is that auto-correct, or are you setting the bar for this team to break the single season win record by 5 games? Can you explain how having 6+ starters to find innings for in Kannapolis translates to having a full major league bullpen? Surely you're not suggesting rushing guys like Fajardo and Combs up to the majors. And relying on guys like Bush and Iriarte to step into the bullpen is what left us with a group of 1.4 WHIP set-up throwers last year. Pick a lane. Either you want Getz to build a team that valiantly wins 60 games, or you want him to complete forsake the big club in the service of filling the minor leagues with every body who doesn't run fast enough to get away. Last year's bullpen was a catastrophe. Layer Grifol's misuse with an historic cloud of bad luck that was so distracting and demoralizing, reliable vets were playing like panicked rookies. (There, I used your mantra. Are you happy?) So yeah, a veteran arm like Tim Hill (who the hoi polloi screamed sucked and didn't even deserve major league innings in the first place) sucked here, then went to a more stable environment, and realized his potential. Trading an 8th round draft pick is not "dumping" them. You also mention "recent draft pickS" with a plural "S". I can count one "recent" draft pick Getz traded out of the last 4 drafts. Are there any other draft picks he's traded ill-advisedly I don't know about? One guy seems to turn into "multiple" with you. Expand It's not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 (edited) On 2/10/2025 at 3:59 PM, WestEddy said: Okay, you're not going to answer my question. Money is a resource they don't seem to want to dole out on relief arms at $5-$7M a clip. You will argue that our minor league system is lacking in everything, yet, we don't have a rookie ball arm/low-A bullpen arm to spare to create a bevy of major league bullpen arms to avoid last year's catastrophe. Expand The relievers Getz is acquiring aren’t worth $5 to $7 million dollar contracts. They are mostly no name guys that have barely thrown many innings. Getz could definitely afford to sign guys on the same level as Booser, Gilbert, and Eisert. They cost a couple million at most on the free agent market, not $5 to $7 million. Edited February 10 by WhiteSox2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:22 PM, Dick Allen said: It's not? Expand So then, I'll put you down in the "wins matter" column, which validates Getz's acquisition of major league bullpen depth pieces. I believe that when this team starts winning again, the fans will come back in throngs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:18 PM, Tnetennba said: Getz may have made some new hires that look good on paper. But it is too soon to know whether those hires actually can fix past organizational failings. Or if they will be allowed to. Those hires, however, do not overshadow Getz's management of the 40 man roster, which to this point borders on catastrophic. Chris Getz is the architect of the worst baseball team in the modern history of the sport, and one good trade does not make up for burning limited trade capital with very little to show for the return and burning millions of dollars in limited payroll on a 121 loss team. Expand This is all fair. But one thing I will say is that we need to give Getz some time to develop into this role. You will never see me justify the hire, but the reality is once Jerry made the call to give a guy without the proper experience the job it was going to take some time to find his bearings. The Vargas trade is a perfect example of that. I think a first time GM without any veteran support and many moving pieces happening concurrently likely got played at the deadline in that deal. Mistakes like that can’t keep happening moving forward, but we also have to accept the fact that Getz is learning on the job because Jerry prioritized familiarity over experience. Will he get better? Probably and the Crochet deal looks more promising than his other deals, but just “better” may not be good enough. And right now, it’s totally fine to be skeptical because of Getz’s poor resume and lacking trade record so far. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:23 PM, WhiteSox2023 said: The relievers Getz is acquiring aren’t worth $5 to $7 million dollar contracts. They are mostly no name guys that have barely thrown many innings. Getz could definitely afford to sign guys on the same level as Booser, Gilbert, and Eisert. Expand Weird how you parrot the exact same deflection that your big buddy SS2k5 did. Of course they aren't. They're pre-arb, for heaven's sake. Fajardo and Combs are also no names who have barely thrown many innings. Booser and Gilbert are much closer to the bigs, and can be part of pro bullpen depth that will mitigate the bleeding for a rebuilding club. And if Getz signed a guy like Booser as a free agent, you'd post multiple times for days, mocking another dumpster dive. Any alternative you offer would be a logical argument if you hadn't already spent so much energy trashing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:15 PM, WestEddy said: If winning games in 2025 isn't important, then I look forward to you never referencing 121 losses again. I'm being constantly beaten over the head with "121 losses", like it's killing the fanbase, and when children still pay attention, it causes all sorts of anxiety disorders, denying families bonding opportunities, and it's this cloud of shame I should feel the weight of. Winning games 42-60 matters or it doesn't. If it does, then shoring up the bullpen and creating depth is key to that. If Getz can create value by trading a marginal guy who was able to strike out 16-year-old kids learning the game in a distant land, then parlaying that into a better prospect in July, all the better. And why do you keep saying 121 wins? Is that auto-correct, or are you setting the bar for this team to break the single season win record by 5 games? Can you explain how having 6+ starters to find innings for in Kannapolis translates to having a full major league bullpen? Surely you're not suggesting rushing guys like Fajardo and Combs up to the majors. And relying on guys like Bush and Iriarte to step into the bullpen is what left us with a group of 1.4 WHIP set-up throwers last year. Pick a lane. Either you want Getz to build a team that valiantly wins 60 games, or you want him to complete forsake the big club in the service of filling the minor leagues with every body who doesn't run fast enough to get away. Last year's bullpen was a catastrophe. Layer Grifol's misuse with an historic cloud of bad luck that was so distracting and demoralizing, reliable vets were playing like panicked rookies. (There, I used your mantra. Are you happy?) So yeah, a veteran arm like Tim Hill (who the hoi polloi screamed sucked and didn't even deserve major league innings in the first place) sucked here, then went to a more stable environment, and realized his potential. Trading an 8th round draft pick is not "dumping" them. You also mention "recent draft pickS" with a plural "S". I can count one "recent" draft pick Getz traded out of the last 4 drafts. Are there any other draft picks he's traded ill-advisedly I don't know about? One guy seems to turn into "multiple" with you. Expand For someone who likes to talk about people not answering your questions, you literally said nothing here that actually responded to the substance of what was ACTUALLY said. Oh sure, you made up things (again) that weren't actually said, and threw in a few more insults (again), but never actually addressed the actual response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:18 PM, WestEddy said: Give an inch, get an inch. If somebody's going to pretend that trading Matt Thompson and passing on signing Michael A. Taylor were catastrophic moves that portend a complete collapse of civilized society, then no, I won't be joining in the chorus calling for senseless firings of guys who were just hired. Expand Why do you mention two acquisitions that no one ever claimed to be catastrophic, rather than the awful acquisitions of Fletcher and Vargas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUSTgottaBELIEVE Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/10/2025 at 5:25 PM, WestEddy said: So then, I'll put you down in the "wins matter" column, which validates Getz's acquisition of major league bullpen depth pieces. I believe that when this team starts winning again, the fans will come back in throngs. Expand Alienating a generation of fans tends to have a long lasting impact on a fanbase. I’m highly skeptical your last sentence is valid but, at this rate, we might not test this theory for another decade. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.