Article on Hanley Ramirez

Lip Man 1 · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 01:03 PM)

Zobrist is far from a "stiff". From reading you posts the past few months, I often wonder if you have any idea what you're talking about. I think this seals it.

59:

One definition of insanity is doing the same failing thing over and over again and expecting it to work. You bring in vets to fill holes when you are ready to contend. The Sox in my opinion are not ready to contend, there are still far to many major black holes in this lineup and on the team.

Let me ask one simple question, why would you want the Sox to get into the same position again that Hahn was trying to dig them out of in 2013?

Signing expensive guys (even assuming someone like Zobrist would even WANT to play for the Sox - which is a mighty big assumption) to deals when they are in their 30's is another recipe for disaster. What you are suggesting is a "Kenny Williams special" and history shows that has worked out SO WELL for this franchise since the start of the 2007 season hasn't it?

They need young talent (which is hard to get granted) not going back to the same philosophy that hasn't worked.

I repeat, I'd rather lose with kids who maybe...just maybe have an upside then lose with guys who simply are not going to get better and don't solve the major issues on this club.

Like Mark Gonzales told me one time, the absolute worst position a team can be in is to have a bunch of declining guys on the roster with big deals who are unmotivated. I'd rather not have the Sox go back to that place...no thank you.

But then again obviously as a Sox historian I have no idea what I'm talking about. LOL! :lol:

Mark

Edited October 12, 2015 by Lip Man 1

Dick Allen · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 03:49 PM)

59:

One definition of insanity is doing the same failing thing over and over again and expecting it to work. You bring in vets to fill holes when you are ready to contend. The Sox in my opinion are not ready to contend, there are still far to many major black holes in this lineup and on the team.

Let me ask one simple question, why would you want the Sox to get into the same position again that Hahn was trying to dig them out of in 2013?

Signing expensive guys (even assuming someone like Zobrist would even WANT to play for the Sox - which is a mighty big assumption) to deals when they are in their 30's is another recipe for disaster. What you are suggesting is a "Kenny Williams special" and history shows that has worked out SO WELL for this franchise since the start of the 2007 season hasn't it?

They need young talent (which is hard to get granted) not going back to the same philosophy that hasn't worked.

I repeat, I'd rather lose with kids who maybe...just maybe have an upside then lose with guys who simply are not going to get better and don't solve the major issues on this club.

Like Mark Gonzales told me one time, the absolute worst position a team can be in is to have a bunch of declining guys on the roster with big deals who are unmotivated. I'd rather not have the Sox go back to that place...no thank you.

But then again obviously as a Sox historian I have no idea what I'm talking about. LOL! :lol:

Mark

Why don't you mention the high priced unmotivated players the White Sox have employed the last 15 years.

caulfield12 · October 12, 2015

Jim Thome was the last really positive veteran addition who made a big impact on the team...his loss surely cost Ozzie the post-season in 2010 (Kotsay/Jones fiasco, which followed the Erstad fiasco....actually, Andruw was fine for his role.)

BlackSox13 · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 01:43 PM)

Third base. Valbuena has 1 year left and also he's just Valbuena.

And at 22.7M, Hanley is just... Hanley. All things being equal I'll take one year of Valbuena over Hanley, his salary and s*** for defense.

Since you have it all figured out, where do the Astros play Lowrie whom is also a 3B? He's under contract through '17 and is not going to sit on the bench for the 14M he is owed during the next two seasons. Again, Houston has no reason or need to trade for Hanley.

In an effort to steer this back on track. What is your trade proposal with Boston that brings Hanley to the White Sox?

ChiSox59 · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 03:49 PM)

59:

One definition of insanity is doing the same failing thing over and over again and expecting it to work. You bring in vets to fill holes when you are ready to contend. The Sox in my opinion are not ready to contend, there are still far to many major black holes in this lineup and on the team.

Let me ask one simple question, why would you want the Sox to get into the same position again that Hahn was trying to dig them out of in 2013?

Signing expensive guys (even assuming someone like Zobrist would even WANT to play for the Sox - which is a mighty big assumption) to deals when they are in their 30's is another recipe for disaster. What you are suggesting is a "Kenny Williams special" and history shows that has worked out SO WELL for this franchise since the start of the 2007 season hasn't it?

They need young talent (which is hard to get granted) not going back to the same philosophy that hasn't worked.

I repeat, I'd rather lose with kids who maybe...just maybe have an upside then lose with guys who simply are not going to get better and don't solve the major issues on this club.

Like Mark Gonzales told me one time, the absolute worst position a team can be in is to have a bunch of declining guys on the roster with big deals who are unmotivated. I'd rather not have the Sox go back to that place...no thank you.

But then again obviously as a Sox historian I have no idea what I'm talking about. LOL! :lol:

Mark

A couple things:

Zobrist being a "stiff" and Zobrist not being the best fit for the 2016 White Sox are very different things. Ben Zobrist is an outstandingly productive and valuable player that any team in MLB would like to have. Is he worth throwing a long term big money deal at? No, but at his age, he is more likely looking at a 2-3 year deal in the $12-$15M AAV range. Not exactly earth shattering in today's game. You've made it clear in the past that you don't like advanced stats (another reason why your historical view on baseball is tired), but take a look at Zobrist's. The numbers don't lie.

I agree that patching a bad team with high priced veterans doesn't always pay off. Sometimes it does, but you can't just look at all of this stuff in a vacuum. If the Sox mostly stand pat, I don't think Zobrist makes much sense. But look, the Sox have one of the best pitchers in baseball on their roster, and decent offensive core. They have the makings of a solid team, if smart moves are made to supplement the roster. You have to stop wasting Chris Sale's prime years...if you throw a bunch of kids out there, you need to trade Sale, and the Sox will never get even money for Sale, so they shouldn't and won't trade him. That is pretty much exactly why I think the Sox will continue to try to supplement their roster rather than tearing it up and trading their best assets. You can pretty much apply this same line of though to Quintana, but obviously down a tier. In that case, a guy like Zobrist makes a ton of sense if you can find other places to improve this teams line up and defense, which I am confident Rick Hahn will leave no stone unturned in his search.

Edited October 12, 2015 by ChiSox59

oldsox · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 03:26 PM)

And at 22.7M, Hanley is just... Hanley. All things being equal I'll take one year of Valbuena over Hanley, his salary and s*** for defense.

Since you have it all figured out, where do the Astros play Lowrie whom is also a 3B? He's under contract through '17 and is not going to sit on the bench for the 14M he is owed during the next two seasons. Again, Houston has no reason or need to trade for Hanley.

In an effort to steer this back on track. What is your trade proposal with Boston that brings Hanley to the White Sox?

I think he said LaRoche for Hanley + cash. Then, someone else pointed out that Bosox do not need LaRoche, even a good LaRoche, and I agree.

BlackSox13 · October 12, 2015

QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 05:43 PM)

I think he said LaRoche for Hanley + cash. Then, someone else pointed out that Bosox do not need LaRoche, even a good LaRoche, and I agree.

Thanks oldsox, I remember Vance saying that now.

I think Boston is going to have a hell of a time finding a team willing to take on Hanley and some portion of his salary. His shoulder and lack of a defensive position really hurts his value.

I'm laughing at myself right now because I'm pretty sure at some point last winter I mentioned the idea of the Sox should try to sign Hanley to play 3B. :lol:

In the end, I'd rather keep LaRoche for one more season and after he's gone the Sox will be able to slide Melky to DH for the last season of his contract.

Lip Man 1 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 03:50 PM)

A couple things:

Zobrist being a "stiff" and Zobrist not being the best fit for the 2016 White Sox are very different things. Ben Zobrist is an outstandingly productive and valuable player that any team in MLB would like to have. Is he worth throwing a long term big money deal at? No, but at his age, he is more likely looking at a 2-3 year deal in the $12-$15M AAV range. Not exactly earth shattering in today's game. You've made it clear in the past that you don't like advanced stats (another reason why your historical view on baseball is tired), but take a look at Zobrist's. The numbers don't lie.

I agree that patching a bad team with high priced veterans doesn't always pay off. Sometimes it does, but you can't just look at all of this stuff in a vacuum. If the Sox mostly stand pat, I don't think Zobrist makes much sense. But look, the Sox have one of the best pitchers in baseball on their roster, and decent offensive core. They have the makings of a solid team, if smart moves are made to supplement the roster. You have to stop wasting Chris Sale's prime years...if you throw a bunch of kids out there, you need to trade Sale, and the Sox will never get even money for Sale, so they shouldn't and won't trade him. That is pretty much exactly why I think the Sox will continue to try to supplement their roster rather than tearing it up and trading their best assets. You can pretty much apply this same line of though to Quintana, but obviously down a tier. In that case, a guy like Zobrist makes a ton of sense if you can find other places to improve this teams line up and defense, which I am confident Rick Hahn will leave no stone unturned in his search.

Reasonable and worth reading. Well done.

To me the Sox have basically three general options and only three short of a radical turnover in either ownership or the front office.

And unfortunately because it's the White Sox, none are ideal:

1. Raise payroll 75 million and sign every decent free agent out there. Now folks on this site have said time and time again the free agent crop this year simply isn't that good especially at the positions the Sox are in desperate need of. Throw in the probability of a drop in season ticket holders due to the results after the last off season and I seriously doubt JR is going to be willing to go this route.

2. Bite the bullet and trade players like Sale, Jose, Q and so on. Not because you are 'throwing in the towel" but because IT'S THE BEST WAY TO INCREASE THE TALENT ON THE MAJOR LEAGUE ROSTER. I go back to my interview with Chuck Tanner before he died. When he and Roland Hemond took over the Sox were the worst franchise in baseball even worse than the expansion teams...yet in a single year they went from 56 wins to 79. How? According to Tanner it was because while he and Roland knew that trading the main assets the team had Luis Aparicio and Ken Berry weren't going to be popular, there was a plan. As Tanner told me (paraphrasing) 'we knew Mike Andrews wasn't as good of a player as Aparicio but Andrews AND Alvarado gave us two good players for one very good player. Rick Reichardt and Jay Johnstone weren't as good of outfielders as Berry but we got two good players for one very good one.' They received or traded 18 players in a 24 period and when it was said and done, the big league roster was better overall, the depth was better, the talent was better. It came at a cost but that's how you can quickly turn a team around "overnight." No one wants to trade say Sale but if you are going to get three or four good players for him only an imbecile would say, "no." You at least have to consider it. You say the Sox can't keep wasting their good years and I agree but the problem is they aren't close to winning anything with those guys and sooner or later either they are going to hit free agency and leave because they want to win or they are going to tell their agents to get them the hell out of Chicago by hook or crook. Do you want to trade them when you have the upper hand or wait until you've got no choice and basically are forced to give them away for scraps?

3. Do what I think the Sox WILL DO. Make some smaller moves, try to shore up an area or two and hope for the best. I think despite all the talk Rick Hahn understands the lack of talent still on the big league roster and in the higher reaches of the farm. He's going to shoot for 2017.

Of the three options I think this probably works best although to me personally I wish the Sox would simply commit to a philosophy and STAY WITH IT come hell or high water. This 'rebuilding while contending' SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK. History shows it the past nine years.

Finally regarding advanced stats. I'll simply say this...they obviously have a part in the game but baseball is played by real life humans with billions of variables in play literally throughout the season...from injuries, to slumps to bad weather to bad calls and fluke bounces. THOSE SIMPLY ARE NOT, CAN NOT AND WILL NEVER BE QUATIFIABLE...period.

I think those who think they can are delusional.

Plus I like to think I'm a fairly intelligent individual. I want to be able to enjoy baseball and not need a f***ing advanced degree in quantum theory or advanced mechanics to be able to...let alone to be able to even try to understand most of the gobbledygook that is being spewed out by some computer geek in his basement on his laptop. (Not directed towards you or anyone in particular but just as a general comment.)

Mark

Edited October 13, 2015 by Lip Man 1

Lillian · October 13, 2015

Lip, do you really think the Sox would have to sign a bunch of free agents, at the cost of raising the payroll by $75 million?

Again, if they can keep the pitching, while bringing in a clean up hitter, and a SS who can bat second, I don't know why the Sox couldn't win a lot of the games they lost, giving up 2 or 3 runs. I just don't understand the rationale behind trying to fix every hole in the lineup. How many teams have good hitters 1 through 9?

oldsox · October 13, 2015

Lipster, please don't try to convince me that trading Aparicio was wise. Please.

Lip Man 1 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (Lillian @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 08:44 PM)

Lip, do you really think the Sox would have to sign a bunch of free agents, at the cost of raising the payroll by $75 million?

Again, if they can keep the pitching, while bringing in a clean up hitter, and a SS who can bat second, I don't know why the Sox couldn't win a lot of the games they lost, giving up 2 or 3 runs. I just don't understand the rationale behind trying to fix every hole in the lineup. How many teams have good hitters 1 through 9?

When you are as bad at defense, fielding and base running as the Sox are you have to compensate by outscoring your opponent (for example the 1977 White Sox). Keep in mind the Sox are going to lose Shark a guy who if nothing else gave you innings and had some, repeat some good games. You are assuming Johnson can fill that void...maybe he can...and maybe he can't. Danks had a remarkable second half for a guy with a bad arm. The odds of that happening again? No one can say but I wouldn't bet your life that he can repeat it. And if the Sox decide to trade Q then what?

So basically the only real constants you have in the rotation right now are Sale and Rodon, if Q stays that's three. How many teams made the playoffs with three starters? Let me give you another example. In 2009 Kenny decided that the Sox rotation was storong enough with Buehrle, Floyd and Danks at the top so that he could gamble with 40% of it being filled with a beat up Jose Contraras and a pre steroid Bartolo Colon. That didn't work out to well did it? Same situation here if you think the Sox could get by with three starters and 'hope' there's that word again that Danks or Johnson or both can produce. It could happen, and it also could blow up in their faces. So you either go out and have to get pitching (which is a tough get today) or compensate by scoring say six runs a game.

I never said the Sox had to have great hitters 1-9, no team has that. On a good team Sanchez would be welcome to hit #9 regardless of what he'd produce offensively because he seems to be a skilled defender.

What the Sox do need, and in typical Sox luck, they basically aren't available are good hitters / power bats for DH, catcher, a corner outfield spot and third base. That's four gaping holes which honestly I don't think they could fill even if JR gave the go ahead to raise the payroll by a gigantic amount (which I'm confident he won't do...)

The Sox are between a rock and a hard place and I don't know if they can find a way out. That's why I'd like to see them blow it up and start over but to do that you have to bring in skilled talent evaluators or you'd just be spinning your wheels (like they are already doing under Kenny Williams)

Mark

Edited October 13, 2015 by Lip Man 1

Lip Man 1 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 08:50 PM)

Lipster, please don't try to convince me that trading Aparicio was wise. Please.

I'm simply telling you what Chuck Tanner told me. That's something you'll have to take up with him where ever his spirit is.

Mark

caulfield12 · October 13, 2015

I don't know about $75 million, but it would be at least $50 million added to put them in a position to legitimately compete again next year.

Let's say $20 million for Heyward/Cespedes/Upton, another $10-12 million for a starting pitcher (assuming you can't realistically hope to compete relying on Erik Johnson from the get-go)...I haven't looked at the contracts coming off the books (Keppinger/Shark/Bonifacio, etc.) enough to know the exact numbers, but we probably have automatic increases in enough contracts so that's another $5-7.5 million you have to account for.

Already then, you're up $35-40 million or so, and still have at least one hole in the bullpen, 3B, SS (let's just assume in this scenario they keep Alexei one last year), 2B, C, RF and DH.

Let's assume we have no choice but to keep LaRoche, so you still have big holes in RF, 2B, 3B and C offensively, defensively or both.

You can't shore up all of those positions, but realistically you have a bigger impact guy at one (maybe you acquire Todd Frazier via trade, for example, and add his salary to the payroll) or split the money across 2 of the 4 remaining ones.

Since we all agree Sanchez is fine as the 9th hitter at 2B, that leaves RF and C unaddressed, so you're still talking a terrible bottom of the order to go with a much-improved 1-6 and you've basically spent $45-50 million to get there. Maybe another $3-5 million or so goes to a veteran reliever (LH), and you've got to replace Beckham, Bonifacio and possibly Soto (Saladino will likely be one of the bench guys, along with Thompson/Shuck).

$75 million is so far removed from reality, there's no point in discussing it. $50 million likely is too, unfortunately.

Thad Bosley · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 03:50 PM)

I agree that patching a bad team with high priced veterans doesn't always pay off. Sometimes it does, but you can't just look at all of this stuff in a vacuum. If the Sox mostly stand pat, I don't think Zobrist makes much sense. But look, the Sox have one of the best pitchers in baseball on their roster, and decent offensive core. They have the makings of a solid team, if smart moves are made to supplement the roster. You have to stop wasting Chris Sale's prime years...if you throw a bunch of kids out there, you need to trade Sale, and the Sox will never get even money for Sale, so they shouldn't and won't trade him. That is pretty much exactly why I think the Sox will continue to try to supplement their roster rather than tearing it up and trading their best assets. You can pretty much apply this same line of though to Quintana, but obviously down a tier. In that case, a guy like Zobrist makes a ton of sense if you can find other places to improve this teams line up and defense, which I am confident Rick Hahn will leave no stone unturned in his search.

Sorry, but you really can't make that statement as of today. Maybe after a series of shrewd offseason moves, perhaps, but not now. If you'll recall, we just finished third to last in the league, thanks to the miserably worst offense and almost as equally abysmal defense. There is nothing "solid" at all there at the moment, save Sale, Abreu, Q, Eaton, and Robertson. Fairly steep drop off after those fellas.

caulfield12 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Oct 13, 2015 -> 07:25 AM)

Sorry, but you really can't make that statement as of today. Maybe after a series of shrewd offseason moves, perhaps, but not now. If you'll recall, we just finished third to last in the league, thanks to the miserably worst offense and almost as equally abysmal defense. There is nothing "solid" at all there at the moment, save Sale, Abreu, Q, Eaton, and Robertson. Fairly steep drop off after those fellas.

Rodon, based on progression the second half...but still a work in progress.

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...ml#incart_river

I really believe a big part of the White Sox problem has been similar...veterans like Dunn, Shark, Rios, Peavy, LaRoche, Keppinger, Bonifacio, Downs, Cabrera, Ramirez, Beckham, etc., bringing down the atmosphere of the clubhouse.

The Indians had to deal with Bourn, Swisher, Moss...didn't really turn the corner until those guys were jettisoned.

Edited October 13, 2015 by caulfield12

Lillian · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 09:26 PM)

When you are as bad at defense, fielding and base running as the Sox are you have to compensate by outscoring your opponent (for example the 1977 White Sox). Keep in mind the Sox are going to lose Shark a guy who if nothing else gave you innings and had some, repeat some good games. You are assuming Johnson can fill that void...maybe he can...and maybe he can't. Danks had a remarkable second half for a guy with a bad arm. The odds of that happening again? No one can say but I wouldn't bet your life that he can repeat it. And if the Sox decide to trade Q then what?

So basically the only real constants you have in the rotation right now are Sale and Rodon, if Q stays that's three. How many teams made the playoffs with three starters? Let me give you another example. In 2009 Kenny decided that the Sox rotation was storong enough with Buehrle, Floyd and Danks at the top so that he could gamble with 40% of it being filled with a beat up Jose Contraras and a pre steroid Bartolo Colon. That didn't work out to well did it? Same situation here if you think the Sox could get by with three starters and 'hope' there's that word again that Danks or Johnson or both can produce. It could happen, and it also could blow up in their faces. So you either go out and have to get pitching (which is a tough get today) or compensate by scoring say six runs a game.

I never said the Sox had to have great hitters 1-9, no team has that. On a good team Sanchez would be welcome to hit #9 regardless of what he'd produce offensively because he seems to be a skilled defender.

What the Sox do need, and in typical Sox luck, they basically aren't available are good hitters / power bats for DH, catcher, a corner outfield spot and third base. That's four gaping holes which honestly I don't think they could fill even if JR gave the go ahead to raise the payroll by a gigantic amount (which I'm confident he won't do...)

The Sox are between a rock and a hard place and I don't know if they can find a way out. That's why I'd like to see them blow it up and start over but to do that you have to bring in skilled talent evaluators or you'd just be spinning your wheels (like they are already doing under Kenny Williams)

Mark

Just a few comments in response to yours:

1) It appears that Danks has slowly, but steadily, been gaining strength in his shoulder. His velocity was back to the low 90's and combined with the change up, which he has refined, his second half success may not be a fluke. He has become a better pitcher, out of necessity, during the time that he lost so much velocity. At this point, I think he is a decent bet to be a very solid 4TH or 5TH starter, who can provide a quality start most of the time. Erik Johnson is likely capable of being the 5TH guy. I think Fulmer may follow Sale and Rodon in coming quickly, even if only in the Pen. The Sox are in the enviable position of not really needing to add any pitching.

2) Find a potent clean up hitter to DH, and the offense should be vastly improved over the pathetic output they got from that spot in the order last season.

3) Don't exercise the $10 Million option on Alexei, and find a slick fielding SS, who can do a credible job in the "2 hole" of the order. They don't need an All Star there, but someone who can hit behind the runner, lay down a bunt and be a plus fielder. I'd prefer a veteran, as Anderson could be ready soon.

4) Give Olt a shot at 3RD. He is a capable defender with huge power potential.

5) Leave Flowers behind the plate, as the pitching staff seems to flourish with him there, and the pitchers like throwing to him.

6) If Thompson can beat out Avi in RF, the outfield defense should be fine with Melky in LF, Eaton in CF and Trayce in RF.

Infield defense would be fine with Olt at 3RD, a new good defensive SS and Sanchez at 2ND.

7) In conclusion, I see two holes, not 4. Just get that big bat to DH and a good defender at SS, who can hit in the 2 hole. What's wrong with that plan?

Edited October 13, 2015 by Lillian

ron883 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 08:56 PM)

Reasonable and worth reading. Well done.

To me the Sox have basically three general options and only three short of a radical turnover in either ownership or the front office.

And unfortunately because it's the White Sox, none are ideal:

1. Raise payroll 75 million and sign every decent free agent out there. Now folks on this site have said time and time again the free agent crop this year simply isn't that good especially at the positions the Sox are in desperate need of. Throw in the probability of a drop in season ticket holders due to the results after the last off season and I seriously doubt JR is going to be willing to go this route.

2. Bite the bullet and trade players like Sale, Jose, Q and so on. Not because you are 'throwing in the towel" but because IT'S THE BEST WAY TO INCREASE THE TALENT ON THE MAJOR LEAGUE ROSTER. I go back to my interview with Chuck Tanner before he died. When he and Roland Hemond took over the Sox were the worst franchise in baseball even worse than the expansion teams...yet in a single year they went from 56 wins to 79. How? According to Tanner it was because while he and Roland knew that trading the main assets the team had Luis Aparicio and Ken Berry weren't going to be popular, there was a plan. As Tanner told me (paraphrasing) 'we knew Mike Andrews wasn't as good of a player as Aparicio but Andrews AND Alvarado gave us two good players for one very good player. Rick Reichardt and Jay Johnstone weren't as good of outfielders as Berry but we got two good players for one very good one.' They received or traded 18 players in a 24 period and when it was said and done, the big league roster was better overall, the depth was better, the talent was better. It came at a cost but that's how you can quickly turn a team around "overnight." No one wants to trade say Sale but if you are going to get three or four good players for him only an imbecile would say, "no." You at least have to consider it. You say the Sox can't keep wasting their good years and I agree but the problem is they aren't close to winning anything with those guys and sooner or later either they are going to hit free agency and leave because they want to win or they are going to tell their agents to get them the hell out of Chicago by hook or crook. Do you want to trade them when you have the upper hand or wait until you've got no choice and basically are forced to give them away for scraps?

3. Do what I think the Sox WILL DO. Make some smaller moves, try to shore up an area or two and hope for the best. I think despite all the talk Rick Hahn understands the lack of talent still on the big league roster and in the higher reaches of the farm. He's going to shoot for 2017.

Of the three options I think this probably works best although to me personally I wish the Sox would simply commit to a philosophy and STAY WITH IT come hell or high water. This 'rebuilding while contending' SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK. History shows it the past nine years.

Finally regarding advanced stats. I'll simply say this...they obviously have a part in the game but baseball is played by real life humans with billions of variables in play literally throughout the season...from injuries, to slumps to bad weather to bad calls and fluke bounces. THOSE SIMPLY ARE NOT, CAN NOT AND WILL NEVER BE QUATIFIABLE...period.

I think those who think they can are delusional.

Plus I like to think I'm a fairly intelligent individual. I want to be able to enjoy baseball and not need a f***ing advanced degree in quantum theory or advanced mechanics to be able to...let alone to be able to even try to understand most of the gobbledygook that is being spewed out by some computer geek in his basement on his laptop. (Not directed towards you or anyone in particular but just as a general comment.)

Mark

"Advanced degree in quantum theory" lmao. This is why people aren't taking you seriously. You don't even need to understand advanced stats to see zobrists value. He has put up 5+ war seasons in 5 of the last 7. But yeah, he's a "stiff". The inability to adapt to advanced statistics is just lazy.

And I think zobrists gets a big contract this off season. He is valuable to any team.

caulfield12 · October 13, 2015

QUOTE (Lillian @ Oct 13, 2015 -> 08:08 AM)