WEBVTT - 2026 White Sox Trade Deadline Preview | Episode 128

0:00:00.800 --> 0:00:03.080
<v Speaker 1>Socks on thirty fifth is next.

0:00:08.039 --> 0:00:09.400
<v Speaker 2>Doors open on the left.

0:00:11.240 --> 0:00:13.640
<v Speaker 1>How's it going, everybody? This is your host, Duke Colfin

0:00:13.680 --> 0:00:16.159
<v Speaker 1>and welcome to the Socks on thirty fifth podcast. We

0:00:16.239 --> 0:00:19.800
<v Speaker 1>are back with another exciting episode covering yours Cargo White Sox.

0:00:20.880 --> 0:00:24.400
<v Speaker 1>I am joined this week by Michael Swarow, Jordan Lazowski,

0:00:24.520 --> 0:00:26.960
<v Speaker 1>Nick Gower. Two of these guys are here all the time.

0:00:27.440 --> 0:00:28.120
<v Speaker 1>Michael's here.

0:00:29.400 --> 0:00:32.360
<v Speaker 3>Have you been on the show, Michael, Yeah, I think

0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:34.680
<v Speaker 3>it's like the twentieth time now that this is my

0:00:34.720 --> 0:00:36.840
<v Speaker 3>first time on the show. For if we're keeping track,

0:00:36.840 --> 0:00:39.280
<v Speaker 3>I gotta go back and like count exactly how many

0:00:39.320 --> 0:00:40.560
<v Speaker 3>times it's been, But it's got.

0:00:40.440 --> 0:00:42.959
<v Speaker 1>To be in the twenties by now. Yeah, I mean

0:00:43.000 --> 0:00:46.279
<v Speaker 1>there's a only there's only twenty first impression. So we're

0:00:46.320 --> 0:00:50.879
<v Speaker 1>glad you're here to make the twentieth gentlemen. Obviously with

0:00:50.960 --> 0:00:55.880
<v Speaker 1>the Astros winning the series, Uh, we couldn't let him sleep?

0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:58.480
<v Speaker 1>When we're talking Mark Kammas shows, how couldn't let him sleep?

0:00:59.480 --> 0:01:04.800
<v Speaker 1>What again? How we feeling about the White Sox this weekend? Guys?

0:01:04.800 --> 0:01:07.839
<v Speaker 2>Still fine? Like, I don't know, it was a dumb game.

0:01:08.080 --> 0:01:11.000
<v Speaker 2>I really hated this weekend series. To be honest with you,

0:01:12.400 --> 0:01:16.960
<v Speaker 2>Sunday was nice. Friday everyone called me dramatic from my

0:01:17.080 --> 0:01:19.560
<v Speaker 2>thought that they if the season doesn't go the way

0:01:19.560 --> 0:01:22.959
<v Speaker 2>they want, they might really regret that game. We're gonna

0:01:22.959 --> 0:01:25.160
<v Speaker 2>have to get into that totally just yet, because you

0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:26.840
<v Speaker 2>just asked me how I'm doing, But I'm doing good

0:01:26.840 --> 0:01:27.720
<v Speaker 2>things for asking Duke.

0:01:29.080 --> 0:01:31.319
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, yeah, same here. I mean I kind of agree

0:01:31.319 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 4>with Jordan. Other than today's game. Obviously, it was a

0:01:34.120 --> 0:01:36.720
<v Speaker 4>bit of a tough series to watch, but I'm doing well.

0:01:36.720 --> 0:01:39.120
<v Speaker 4>And it's kind of interesting because I remember on one

0:01:39.160 --> 0:01:41.720
<v Speaker 4>of our old episodes, Jordan had like it was like

0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:43.120
<v Speaker 4>a fun fact or something, but he was like he

0:01:43.160 --> 0:01:44.320
<v Speaker 4>had never been to a concert.

0:01:44.640 --> 0:01:45.720
<v Speaker 2>That was like his fact.

0:01:45.920 --> 0:01:47.360
<v Speaker 4>And the reason I bring that up is because I

0:01:47.720 --> 0:01:50.680
<v Speaker 4>just finished a stretch where I went to five concerts

0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:52.760
<v Speaker 4>in six weeks. I'm like, I'm done with it now, Like,

0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:55.240
<v Speaker 4>but it's kind of funny. I've thought about Jordan. When

0:01:55.280 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 4>I realized, I was like, oh, that's like we couldn't

0:01:56.960 --> 0:01:58.320
<v Speaker 4>be more different in that regard.

0:01:59.080 --> 0:02:03.680
<v Speaker 2>Well, I'm going to one in November Zach ground Band.

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:05.760
<v Speaker 2>I'm a huge country fan, so I'm looking forward to that.

0:02:05.840 --> 0:02:07.480
<v Speaker 2>But that'll be like number three.

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:10.000
<v Speaker 1>So okay, I got a ways to go.

0:02:10.360 --> 0:02:12.080
<v Speaker 3>You're getting that counts on a good show.

0:02:12.120 --> 0:02:13.360
<v Speaker 1>I've been to one of his concerts.

0:02:13.400 --> 0:02:16.840
<v Speaker 2>I have heard that so fun. I have heard that

0:02:16.880 --> 0:02:18.839
<v Speaker 2>they definitely put on a good show, so I'm very

0:02:18.840 --> 0:02:20.600
<v Speaker 2>excited for it. So they're one of my favorites.

0:02:21.320 --> 0:02:25.120
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I'm doing good as well. Uh, no concerts on

0:02:25.160 --> 0:02:27.040
<v Speaker 3>my agenda. I am going to be at the SOXS

0:02:27.040 --> 0:02:30.480
<v Speaker 3>game tomorrow though, And uh, I think I do have

0:02:30.600 --> 0:02:34.040
<v Speaker 3>to try one of those new sushi push pops that

0:02:34.080 --> 0:02:37.440
<v Speaker 3>they're apparently like. I was sketched out about them at first,

0:02:37.440 --> 0:02:39.440
<v Speaker 3>but everyone's saying they're really good. So I'm like, all right,

0:02:39.480 --> 0:02:41.040
<v Speaker 3>now I have to try one. And I think there's

0:02:41.080 --> 0:02:43.720
<v Speaker 3>one like two sections away for where I'm gonna be sitting,

0:02:43.760 --> 0:02:46.240
<v Speaker 3>So I have to and I will let you guys

0:02:46.240 --> 0:02:46.839
<v Speaker 3>know how they are.

0:02:47.440 --> 0:02:52.000
<v Speaker 1>Okay, So as a genuine and you know, I'm sorry

0:02:52.040 --> 0:02:54.440
<v Speaker 1>if this is just earth chattering anybody. I'm not a

0:02:54.440 --> 0:02:56.799
<v Speaker 1>big sushi guy. I don't enjoy the idea of a

0:02:56.919 --> 0:03:01.240
<v Speaker 1>raw fish in any sort of way. That's really nasty

0:03:01.280 --> 0:03:04.040
<v Speaker 1>food poisoning in the past. Because of that, it also

0:03:04.120 --> 0:03:07.360
<v Speaker 1>doesn't surprise me that, like, I need a check from

0:03:07.400 --> 0:03:10.800
<v Speaker 1>everybody right now. So Michael's obviously sushi.

0:03:10.440 --> 0:03:15.359
<v Speaker 4>Guy, last big sushi guy. Nick not really only for

0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:17.160
<v Speaker 4>that work, and I like kind of have to eat.

0:03:17.040 --> 0:03:23.560
<v Speaker 1>It, okay, So it's it's ceremoniously split because Nick will

0:03:23.600 --> 0:03:27.600
<v Speaker 1>not go out and search for sushi, but last obviously

0:03:27.639 --> 0:03:30.240
<v Speaker 1>big sushi guy. Michael, you got a lot us know

0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:33.160
<v Speaker 1>how it is, because yeah, I mean you hear sushi

0:03:33.200 --> 0:03:36.400
<v Speaker 1>push pop and red Flags pop in your head. It's

0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 1>it's catchy, but a push pop with sushi. It's like

0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:42.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, I thought about it.

0:03:43.520 --> 0:03:45.720
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I was sketched out at first, but like every

0:03:45.760 --> 0:03:48.680
<v Speaker 3>review comes like they're like saying like this has like

0:03:48.840 --> 0:03:52.880
<v Speaker 3>no business being as good as it is. I think

0:03:52.920 --> 0:03:55.080
<v Speaker 3>they're I don't think these are raw fish. I think

0:03:55.120 --> 0:03:58.320
<v Speaker 3>it's like ones like imitation crab, the others shrimp Temporal,

0:03:58.400 --> 0:04:01.400
<v Speaker 3>both of which are like cooked seafood. So I think

0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:05.960
<v Speaker 3>that helps a little bit. Still a weird concept, but

0:04:06.120 --> 0:04:10.400
<v Speaker 3>I feel like I just have to try some country.

0:04:10.160 --> 0:04:13.120
<v Speaker 2>Music and sushi. Michael, you and I have more in

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:15.680
<v Speaker 2>common than I thought. All right, now we have to

0:04:15.680 --> 0:04:17.919
<v Speaker 2>go to a concert together. I know that's what it

0:04:18.000 --> 0:04:18.520
<v Speaker 2>sounds like.

0:04:19.800 --> 0:04:23.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm so down for that. Well, as a non Senshian

0:04:23.480 --> 0:04:27.920
<v Speaker 1>jar and country fan, I'll just stick to Luke Holmb's so.

0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:29.880
<v Speaker 2>That's fine too. I'll accept that.

0:04:31.600 --> 0:04:36.040
<v Speaker 1>Well anyway, as riveting as sushi and country music is together.

0:04:36.960 --> 0:04:38.960
<v Speaker 1>We've got quite a bit to cover in this episode,

0:04:39.200 --> 0:04:41.800
<v Speaker 1>but before we get started, be sure subscribe to the

0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:44.960
<v Speaker 1>podcast on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and anywhere else to your podcast.

0:04:45.480 --> 0:04:47.760
<v Speaker 1>Also sure to check out the website socks on thirtyfifth

0:04:47.800 --> 0:04:49.880
<v Speaker 1>dot com, as well as following us on Facebook, Twitter,

0:04:49.920 --> 0:04:53.760
<v Speaker 1>and Instagram at sos on thirty fifth and YouTube as well,

0:04:53.800 --> 0:04:56.279
<v Speaker 1>where we already have some questions going White Sox O

0:04:56.360 --> 0:04:59.760
<v Speaker 1>three says, good afternoon, boys. It is eight pm here,

0:05:00.040 --> 0:05:02.000
<v Speaker 1>so maybe the time's a little bit off, but I

0:05:02.040 --> 0:05:09.279
<v Speaker 1>do appreciate it anyway. We we love our fans regardless. So,

0:05:09.480 --> 0:05:11.560
<v Speaker 1>as I kind of alluded to in the intro, White

0:05:11.640 --> 0:05:16.880
<v Speaker 1>Sox struggled against the Astros the sixth inning. I don't

0:05:16.880 --> 0:05:18.640
<v Speaker 1>think I need to say anything more than that, but

0:05:18.720 --> 0:05:22.040
<v Speaker 1>it felt like it was just doomed. Every single time

0:05:22.120 --> 0:05:24.880
<v Speaker 1>we would we would start pitching in the six and

0:05:25.600 --> 0:05:29.279
<v Speaker 1>we saw the absolute worst of it over the weekend

0:05:30.240 --> 0:05:32.440
<v Speaker 1>Is this something that's been a common threat throughout the season.

0:05:32.480 --> 0:05:35.480
<v Speaker 1>Maybe not, but there have been points in the season,

0:05:35.720 --> 0:05:39.440
<v Speaker 1>in my opinion, where I feel like we have hit

0:05:39.520 --> 0:05:42.599
<v Speaker 1>that one snag in the line and really let it

0:05:42.640 --> 0:05:47.440
<v Speaker 1>affect the rest of the game for us. Did anything

0:05:47.480 --> 0:05:49.640
<v Speaker 1>from these games change your guys opinion? Micha go, I'll

0:05:49.680 --> 0:05:52.479
<v Speaker 1>let you kick it off because you're the host. Did

0:05:52.520 --> 0:05:54.719
<v Speaker 1>anything from these games kind of like kick it off?

0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:58.119
<v Speaker 1>Or you're the guest? I should say, I'm sorry, it's

0:05:58.200 --> 0:05:59.520
<v Speaker 1>it's Sunday, dude, I'm just.

0:06:00.680 --> 0:06:01.240
<v Speaker 2>Taking your job.

0:06:02.680 --> 0:06:08.039
<v Speaker 1>What's that? That's not apparently I'm taking your job now, Well,

0:06:08.120 --> 0:06:10.200
<v Speaker 1>it'd be crazy for a first time guess to take

0:06:10.240 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 1>my job. But what are your takeaways from this weekend?

0:06:15.800 --> 0:06:20.200
<v Speaker 1>Obviously it's it's something we've seen before. It's not the

0:06:20.200 --> 0:06:22.680
<v Speaker 1>first time something like this has happened. But how how

0:06:22.800 --> 0:06:25.240
<v Speaker 1>dire does losing two out of three to the Astros feel?

0:06:25.880 --> 0:06:29.560
<v Speaker 3>I mean, really not that dire because Cleveland just got

0:06:29.600 --> 0:06:32.479
<v Speaker 3>swept and so after this series we still gained a

0:06:32.520 --> 0:06:36.920
<v Speaker 3>game on them. It also just kind of more than

0:06:36.960 --> 0:06:42.160
<v Speaker 3>anything confirmed like my concerns about this team, like we

0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:44.719
<v Speaker 3>need more pitching, we need to add some pitching to

0:06:44.760 --> 0:06:48.919
<v Speaker 3>this team. So that's really where I'm at, is like

0:06:49.400 --> 0:06:51.800
<v Speaker 3>we're still in the playoff on that hasn't changed, but

0:06:51.960 --> 0:06:57.440
<v Speaker 3>like bolster the bolster, the rotation gets some more reliable

0:06:57.520 --> 0:06:59.440
<v Speaker 3>arms so that we don't have to throw sy Anthy

0:06:59.440 --> 0:07:02.760
<v Speaker 3>Tomingas out there in any important innings anymore.

0:07:03.560 --> 0:07:03.800
<v Speaker 1>Uh.

0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:07.400
<v Speaker 3>But in general, like the series kind of sucked. But

0:07:07.880 --> 0:07:11.280
<v Speaker 3>I'm not like overreacting to Like I'm not saying like, oh,

0:07:11.320 --> 0:07:13.840
<v Speaker 3>like we can't be buyers anymore, Like my my opinion

0:07:13.880 --> 0:07:14.760
<v Speaker 3>hasn't really changed.

0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:20.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, my biggest thing from the week is okay, and

0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:22.120
<v Speaker 2>I put out what everyone not everyone. A lot of

0:07:22.120 --> 0:07:23.880
<v Speaker 2>people called it dramatic, where I'm like, and I even

0:07:23.880 --> 0:07:26.200
<v Speaker 2>called it dramatic, like losing a five to nothing leading

0:07:26.240 --> 0:07:28.960
<v Speaker 2>the sixth inning at what twelve outs to get like

0:07:29.080 --> 0:07:32.360
<v Speaker 2>you're gonna regret that at some point the season, even

0:07:32.360 --> 0:07:34.360
<v Speaker 2>if it all goes well, and especially if it doesn't.

0:07:34.360 --> 0:07:36.960
<v Speaker 2>Everyone's like, oh, that's it's dramatic. It's just one game.

0:07:37.000 --> 0:07:40.760
<v Speaker 2>They all mean the same like yes, but no, because

0:07:41.520 --> 0:07:46.320
<v Speaker 2>Cleveland lost that day too, So that for me is like,

0:07:46.360 --> 0:07:49.400
<v Speaker 2>all right, you were in the driver's seat, you gave

0:07:49.560 --> 0:07:53.640
<v Speaker 2>up the driver's seat you crashed the car practically, and

0:07:53.720 --> 0:07:55.880
<v Speaker 2>it was a chance to pick up a game, right Like,

0:07:56.160 --> 0:07:58.600
<v Speaker 2>it kept putting pressure on, like you had to pick

0:07:58.640 --> 0:08:02.520
<v Speaker 2>up something this weekend, especially if Cleveland wasn't gonna win

0:08:02.520 --> 0:08:04.840
<v Speaker 2>a ball game. You can't go and get swept when

0:08:04.880 --> 0:08:10.840
<v Speaker 2>your opponent gets swept, your division rival opponent gets swept.

0:08:11.280 --> 0:08:14.760
<v Speaker 2>That was the frustration for me, and I think even

0:08:14.840 --> 0:08:17.440
<v Speaker 2>Venable kind of said it too, like you know that

0:08:17.800 --> 0:08:21.080
<v Speaker 2>can't happen essentially, like even if they all mean the

0:08:21.120 --> 0:08:22.960
<v Speaker 2>same in the grand scheme of one sixty two, like

0:08:23.760 --> 0:08:25.520
<v Speaker 2>there was this division by a game or two. You

0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:27.880
<v Speaker 2>look at games like this, not where you get shut out,

0:08:28.040 --> 0:08:30.520
<v Speaker 2>right whatever, that that's gonna happen. That's baseball. It's when

0:08:30.560 --> 0:08:33.679
<v Speaker 2>you just melt down. You had the game practically on

0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:35.679
<v Speaker 2>ice at that point at five nothing and you can

0:08:35.760 --> 0:08:42.120
<v Speaker 2>finish it off. Does it change much? No, realistically confirms

0:08:42.120 --> 0:08:44.640
<v Speaker 2>like Michael said, some of the issues. But it's just

0:08:44.679 --> 0:08:46.360
<v Speaker 2>more of a frustration more than anything else.

0:08:46.440 --> 0:08:49.719
<v Speaker 4>I guess I'll say, yeah, I'm kind of in the

0:08:49.720 --> 0:08:52.000
<v Speaker 4>same place as you too. I mean, Friday's game in

0:08:52.040 --> 0:08:53.880
<v Speaker 4>a lot of ways felt like a fever dream in

0:08:53.920 --> 0:08:57.440
<v Speaker 4>that there were like thirteen popouts by White Sox hitters.

0:08:57.480 --> 0:08:59.720
<v Speaker 4>Everything was a pop up that was insane. And then

0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:02.720
<v Speaker 4>on top of that the dread and sixth inning we're

0:09:02.720 --> 0:09:05.319
<v Speaker 4>talking about, Like, yeah, it was a beginning for Houston.

0:09:05.320 --> 0:09:07.720
<v Speaker 4>It would have been a beginning either way. But I

0:09:07.760 --> 0:09:10.560
<v Speaker 4>will say, like two, I think actually three of their

0:09:10.640 --> 0:09:13.240
<v Speaker 4>hits were just like chopped directly down into the ground

0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:15.320
<v Speaker 4>at like fifty four miles an hours, Like there's nothing

0:09:15.320 --> 0:09:16.960
<v Speaker 4>you can do when I that that is basically a

0:09:16.960 --> 0:09:19.000
<v Speaker 4>free single, even if the slowest runner on the team

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:21.360
<v Speaker 4>is running. So that happened like three times the same thing.

0:09:21.440 --> 0:09:23.679
<v Speaker 4>I say, Okay, like this is just not our our

0:09:23.720 --> 0:09:25.840
<v Speaker 4>in a not our day or whatever. It's baseball, right,

0:09:25.840 --> 0:09:28.200
<v Speaker 4>it's like playing Cleveland. That stuff always happens for Cleveland.

0:09:28.480 --> 0:09:31.280
<v Speaker 4>What is more frustrating to me, and it's not the

0:09:31.320 --> 0:09:35.119
<v Speaker 4>team's fault necessarily, but just the day to day consistency

0:09:35.160 --> 0:09:37.240
<v Speaker 4>of the offense is so strange. Like all of July,

0:09:37.280 --> 0:09:39.280
<v Speaker 4>it's been like either score eight to twelve runs or

0:09:39.280 --> 0:09:41.600
<v Speaker 4>they're scoring like zero to one. And I feel that

0:09:41.760 --> 0:09:44.679
<v Speaker 4>has been the case for too long now. We were

0:09:44.720 --> 0:09:46.720
<v Speaker 4>talking before this game, Sunday's a game about how they

0:09:46.760 --> 0:09:48.560
<v Speaker 4>hadn't hit a home run in like a week, then

0:09:48.600 --> 0:09:50.800
<v Speaker 4>they hit like four or five and one game. Like again,

0:09:50.840 --> 0:09:54.120
<v Speaker 4>I understand it's they don't really you can't really control

0:09:54.120 --> 0:09:55.520
<v Speaker 4>some of this stuff. But at the same time, there's

0:09:55.559 --> 0:09:57.439
<v Speaker 4>a lot of variance in this offense, and I would

0:09:57.440 --> 0:10:01.079
<v Speaker 4>love like more consistent like four to run outputs rather

0:10:01.120 --> 0:10:03.400
<v Speaker 4>than these you know, high highs and low lows that

0:10:03.400 --> 0:10:05.640
<v Speaker 4>they're putting up well.

0:10:05.640 --> 0:10:09.480
<v Speaker 1>And I almost wonder what the scouting report, like, what

0:10:09.520 --> 0:10:11.920
<v Speaker 1>the scouting report would be for the White Sox offense

0:10:12.480 --> 0:10:15.920
<v Speaker 1>and how teams handle certain pictures with certain strengths going

0:10:15.960 --> 0:10:18.840
<v Speaker 1>into our lineup, because it feels like, kind of like

0:10:18.880 --> 0:10:21.080
<v Speaker 1>you said, Nick, we really do come into some of

0:10:21.080 --> 0:10:23.719
<v Speaker 1>these games and the offense is just ready from the go,

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:27.840
<v Speaker 1>swinging the bad hard. There was an example before in

0:10:27.880 --> 0:10:30.360
<v Speaker 1>the at bat that Miguel Vargas hit a home run today.

0:10:30.559 --> 0:10:32.960
<v Speaker 1>You could see off the first swing even when he missed,

0:10:33.120 --> 0:10:35.520
<v Speaker 1>and like it's like, oh, Miguel's trying to take this

0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:37.800
<v Speaker 1>out of the ballpark. That's at bat, like he was

0:10:37.840 --> 0:10:41.679
<v Speaker 1>swinging hard, and you know that's it's not like an

0:10:41.720 --> 0:10:44.280
<v Speaker 1>effort thing. It's not like a you know, like why

0:10:44.280 --> 0:10:45.920
<v Speaker 1>aren't these guys trying to hit home runs every single

0:10:45.960 --> 0:10:48.560
<v Speaker 1>time at the bad thing? But I almost wonder what

0:10:48.600 --> 0:10:53.280
<v Speaker 1>the game plan is going into certain picture strengths. I

0:10:53.320 --> 0:10:55.240
<v Speaker 1>wonder kind of what the scouting report looks like and

0:10:55.320 --> 0:10:57.000
<v Speaker 1>kind of like what they're trying to emphasize on a

0:10:57.120 --> 0:10:59.640
<v Speaker 1>day to day basis, because there are some days where

0:10:59.640 --> 0:11:03.360
<v Speaker 1>you can tell, well, the hitting philosophy is like let's

0:11:03.840 --> 0:11:06.079
<v Speaker 1>you know, let's get some home runs. Like this, this

0:11:06.280 --> 0:11:08.240
<v Speaker 1>pitching rotation or this pitcher that we have on the

0:11:08.280 --> 0:11:11.320
<v Speaker 1>mound to day gives up home runs. Uh, the relievers

0:11:11.320 --> 0:11:13.440
<v Speaker 1>that they would likely use if we had a closer game,

0:11:13.800 --> 0:11:15.200
<v Speaker 1>they strike out a lot of people, but they do

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:17.920
<v Speaker 1>give up very hittable balls, And then you know, like

0:11:18.000 --> 0:11:21.720
<v Speaker 1>how do they handle teams that are specifically like weak

0:11:21.760 --> 0:11:23.680
<v Speaker 1>ground ball type pitching? You know what I mean? So

0:11:23.720 --> 0:11:26.600
<v Speaker 1>I almost want, like, I wonder what the philosophy that

0:11:26.840 --> 0:11:29.760
<v Speaker 1>is going forward, not to try to make excuses for

0:11:29.800 --> 0:11:32.520
<v Speaker 1>the lineup. Sometimes guys just you know, yeah, they have

0:11:32.520 --> 0:11:35.800
<v Speaker 1>a tough day at the office. That's baseball. I also,

0:11:36.360 --> 0:11:40.240
<v Speaker 1>I think last to your point about you know, watching

0:11:40.360 --> 0:11:43.480
<v Speaker 1>seeing games like that and like looking back on it

0:11:43.559 --> 0:11:45.400
<v Speaker 1>and then seeing where you are later in the year,

0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:47.520
<v Speaker 1>once you're in like September and wondering what you could

0:11:47.520 --> 0:11:51.720
<v Speaker 1>have done different. That's certainly that's a good point to have.

0:11:52.440 --> 0:11:54.840
<v Speaker 1>The biggest thing is the White Sox have to realize

0:11:55.880 --> 0:11:59.880
<v Speaker 1>when they when these games happen, it puts more strenuous

0:12:00.000 --> 0:12:02.160
<v Speaker 1>effort on what they have to do it in September,

0:12:02.440 --> 0:12:04.640
<v Speaker 1>and I think with a team that's not totally experienced

0:12:04.640 --> 0:12:07.079
<v Speaker 1>of being in a playoff run, that's maybe not something

0:12:07.120 --> 0:12:09.280
<v Speaker 1>they're going to totally grasp right now, but it's something

0:12:09.320 --> 0:12:12.520
<v Speaker 1>they could grasp by the time it really gets to

0:12:12.559 --> 0:12:14.520
<v Speaker 1>the final end. The final stretch of the year here

0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:16.360
<v Speaker 1>in cleveland's really putting pressure on us.

0:12:16.360 --> 0:12:22.720
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, I just and again I don't like reacting

0:12:22.800 --> 0:12:27.040
<v Speaker 2>overreacting to one one game, right, And it comes off

0:12:27.120 --> 0:12:29.480
<v Speaker 2>very much like that when I say what I said.

0:12:29.480 --> 0:12:32.480
<v Speaker 2>But at the same time, it's like we've talked all

0:12:32.520 --> 0:12:35.760
<v Speaker 2>season about the waves of changing expectations for this team,

0:12:35.840 --> 0:12:40.040
<v Speaker 2>and that's that's part of the calculus here, right We're

0:12:40.080 --> 0:12:43.240
<v Speaker 2>about to have a whole episode as we go through

0:12:43.280 --> 0:12:46.000
<v Speaker 2>just fan questions about like buying at the deadline, and

0:12:46.080 --> 0:12:47.800
<v Speaker 2>it's not like one game is going to change that

0:12:48.040 --> 0:12:49.960
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people are panicing like, oh, I hate

0:12:49.960 --> 0:12:54.120
<v Speaker 2>losing around the deadline. That's not You've already decided your direction,

0:12:55.000 --> 0:12:57.720
<v Speaker 2>like seven days before. You know which way you're going

0:12:58.040 --> 0:13:01.840
<v Speaker 2>for the most part at this point, so it's not

0:13:02.040 --> 0:13:04.679
<v Speaker 2>that drastic of a change. But what it really comes

0:13:04.720 --> 0:13:08.920
<v Speaker 2>down to being is you know, how often do you

0:13:08.960 --> 0:13:13.040
<v Speaker 2>let your flaws get exposed? And I think that was

0:13:13.080 --> 0:13:15.640
<v Speaker 2>just a clear example, like everything got exposed at the

0:13:15.640 --> 0:13:17.280
<v Speaker 2>same time. It's kind of a good wake up call

0:13:17.360 --> 0:13:19.040
<v Speaker 2>for probably Chris gets like, hey, if you if you're

0:13:19.080 --> 0:13:24.040
<v Speaker 2>really gonna do something to help this team, everything went

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:26.640
<v Speaker 2>on display that night for you, so go figure it

0:13:26.679 --> 0:13:30.800
<v Speaker 2>out from there. Kind of all series actually too, some

0:13:30.880 --> 0:13:33.680
<v Speaker 2>of the starting pitching concerns, bullpen concerns because of the

0:13:33.720 --> 0:13:38.319
<v Speaker 2>starting pitching concerns, and how that all kind of added

0:13:38.400 --> 0:13:40.000
<v Speaker 2>up together well, And I.

0:13:39.920 --> 0:13:42.320
<v Speaker 1>Think you framed that well, and Michael, I don't Michael

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:43.720
<v Speaker 1>or Nick, I'm not sure if you have a different

0:13:43.760 --> 0:13:46.760
<v Speaker 1>opinion on it, but I think I don't think this

0:13:46.920 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 1>changes any sort of idea of what Chris Gott's going

0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:51.440
<v Speaker 1>to do with the deadline. As you said, I think

0:13:51.480 --> 0:13:53.560
<v Speaker 1>he kind of has it set set in stone that

0:13:55.000 --> 0:13:57.400
<v Speaker 1>any moves, any non moves he's gonna make is already

0:13:57.400 --> 0:14:01.199
<v Speaker 1>pretty clear. It's just it's just a valuation at this point,

0:14:01.480 --> 0:14:03.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, like kind of similar to like how before

0:14:03.960 --> 0:14:05.480
<v Speaker 1>the season started, we thought this team was going to

0:14:05.520 --> 0:14:07.600
<v Speaker 1>be terrible, so the evaluation was going to be who's

0:14:07.640 --> 0:14:09.920
<v Speaker 1>going to be here next year? The evaluation right now

0:14:10.040 --> 0:14:13.000
<v Speaker 1>is like, oh, we're really good. Who who can we

0:14:13.120 --> 0:14:18.240
<v Speaker 1>realistically move? And what do we realistically need to make

0:14:18.280 --> 0:14:20.960
<v Speaker 1>that final run stretch here at the end. You know.

0:14:21.040 --> 0:14:23.440
<v Speaker 1>So I don't think this, I don't think this would

0:14:23.480 --> 0:14:26.080
<v Speaker 1>change any sort of target or who we could possibly

0:14:26.080 --> 0:14:27.120
<v Speaker 1>give up in any stretch.

0:14:28.400 --> 0:14:31.120
<v Speaker 2>No, it just it just more than anything I said,

0:14:31.120 --> 0:14:36.040
<v Speaker 2>it amplifies things and to reframe that exact phrase and

0:14:36.080 --> 0:14:38.320
<v Speaker 2>puts a spotlight on it right like that that game

0:14:38.840 --> 0:14:42.080
<v Speaker 2>was this week Like I said, this weekend was everything

0:14:42.080 --> 0:14:44.920
<v Speaker 2>where it's like, hey, solidified everything we're going to talk

0:14:44.920 --> 0:14:45.280
<v Speaker 2>about here.

0:14:47.920 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And you know, I I think Sunday shows what

0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:54.480
<v Speaker 1>this what this lineup is still capable of as well,

0:14:54.800 --> 0:14:58.000
<v Speaker 1>and what we can do even if there are some

0:14:58.080 --> 0:15:00.520
<v Speaker 1>runs across the board, we can still make it a

0:15:00.560 --> 0:15:03.480
<v Speaker 1>game that's you know, outside of reach. I mean even

0:15:03.520 --> 0:15:06.160
<v Speaker 1>look at last week, I think what we scored five

0:15:06.240 --> 0:15:08.920
<v Speaker 1>runs in the eighth or ninth inning of a game

0:15:08.960 --> 0:15:12.880
<v Speaker 1>that we were already winning comfortably. So, like the the

0:15:12.560 --> 0:15:15.840
<v Speaker 1>the guns can get turned on fast, and the offense

0:15:15.960 --> 0:15:19.280
<v Speaker 1>isn't something that anybody should really be too worried about.

0:15:19.320 --> 0:15:21.080
<v Speaker 1>I think we'll find a way to be able to

0:15:21.200 --> 0:15:23.640
<v Speaker 1>stay competitive on a game and game basis. But makes

0:15:23.640 --> 0:15:25.400
<v Speaker 1>a job a lot easier for the offense when you

0:15:25.440 --> 0:15:27.920
<v Speaker 1>have the right arms on the mound throughout the entire game.

0:15:28.000 --> 0:15:29.960
<v Speaker 1>So I think that's going to be still the number

0:15:29.960 --> 0:15:34.560
<v Speaker 1>one priority for the White Sox. Michael, you recently wrote

0:15:34.600 --> 0:15:37.160
<v Speaker 1>an article speaking of the trade deadline and kind of

0:15:37.160 --> 0:15:40.120
<v Speaker 1>like looking at what we're looking at about prospects who

0:15:40.200 --> 0:15:43.960
<v Speaker 1>might be available for the White Sox trade at the deadline.

0:15:44.240 --> 0:15:46.480
<v Speaker 1>How did you come across coming up with these names?

0:15:48.120 --> 0:15:50.760
<v Speaker 1>Do they have cool sounding names? And do they you think,

0:15:50.800 --> 0:15:53.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, maybe that's something that could go towards another

0:15:53.960 --> 0:15:58.640
<v Speaker 1>team marketing department? Are they twenty eight years old and

0:15:58.680 --> 0:16:00.920
<v Speaker 1>they're hitting really well in double lay? How did you

0:16:00.920 --> 0:16:02.000
<v Speaker 1>come up with these names?

0:16:02.520 --> 0:16:05.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the way that their names sound is always how

0:16:05.640 --> 0:16:08.520
<v Speaker 3>I do my my prospect drinkings in case, everyone was

0:16:08.560 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 3>wondering like that.

0:16:09.600 --> 0:16:12.920
<v Speaker 1>Tim tim tim Elko has just the name has so

0:16:13.000 --> 0:16:16.440
<v Speaker 1>much star power without even knowing what he does. Tim

0:16:16.480 --> 0:16:18.960
<v Speaker 1>Elko was never part of my top thirty and never

0:16:19.000 --> 0:16:22.600
<v Speaker 1>will be. No, we'll speaking that.

0:16:22.640 --> 0:16:25.400
<v Speaker 3>Actually it was kind of timed up well because since

0:16:25.440 --> 0:16:28.960
<v Speaker 3>the draft I have been going back and updating or

0:16:29.000 --> 0:16:32.440
<v Speaker 3>getting ready for socks on thirty fifths mid season Top

0:16:32.480 --> 0:16:35.760
<v Speaker 3>thirty prospect drinkings, so names are already kind of you know,

0:16:35.840 --> 0:16:41.280
<v Speaker 3>fresh in my head. But it just kind of looking around,

0:16:41.360 --> 0:16:46.480
<v Speaker 3>like who could teams realistically be interested in? Is like

0:16:46.640 --> 0:16:49.280
<v Speaker 3>how I was looking at it, and like who, Like like,

0:16:49.320 --> 0:16:53.760
<v Speaker 3>where do we have surpluses in positional depth? Does that

0:16:53.840 --> 0:16:55.720
<v Speaker 3>line up with what some of these sellers might be

0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:58.560
<v Speaker 3>looking for? Like specifically, we have a lot of middle

0:16:58.600 --> 0:17:02.080
<v Speaker 3>and field depth, and that's something that most teams that

0:17:02.120 --> 0:17:04.600
<v Speaker 3>are sellers, like they're going to be looking for shortstops,

0:17:04.600 --> 0:17:07.600
<v Speaker 3>like they typically have a little more positional value. And

0:17:08.000 --> 0:17:10.439
<v Speaker 3>again that's something that we have a decent amount of.

0:17:10.480 --> 0:17:13.320
<v Speaker 3>So like that I highlighted that in the article. Won't

0:17:13.320 --> 0:17:15.199
<v Speaker 3>give up too much so you guys can go read it.

0:17:15.280 --> 0:17:18.680
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, it's more just like where do we have

0:17:19.160 --> 0:17:23.000
<v Speaker 3>like names that teams realistically would be interested in that

0:17:23.080 --> 0:17:28.080
<v Speaker 3>actually carry some value, but like the White Sox could be.

0:17:27.720 --> 0:17:30.879
<v Speaker 1>Willing to move. I guess is the easiest way to put.

0:17:30.760 --> 0:17:36.359
<v Speaker 2>It, Michael, Let me ask you this on top of that, now,

0:17:36.440 --> 0:17:38.879
<v Speaker 2>how much do you buyd In the most recent report,

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:41.560
<v Speaker 2>the Socks aren't willing to trade anyone inside their top

0:17:41.640 --> 0:17:45.280
<v Speaker 2>ten prospects, which depending on the list might mean different

0:17:45.280 --> 0:17:48.680
<v Speaker 2>guys at seven, eight, nine, to ten, whatever. But also,

0:17:49.080 --> 0:17:50.960
<v Speaker 2>what do you think of the idea? And I mentioned

0:17:50.960 --> 0:17:54.920
<v Speaker 2>it last episode of it seems like a lot of

0:17:54.960 --> 0:17:58.040
<v Speaker 2>guys around the trade deadline are those eighteen nineteen year

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:02.879
<v Speaker 2>olds who maybe have a little bit of helium but

0:18:03.080 --> 0:18:07.320
<v Speaker 2>aren't twenty one, twenty three. More importantly, the teams really

0:18:07.320 --> 0:18:11.439
<v Speaker 2>look for younger prospects, especially at the trade deadline, more

0:18:11.440 --> 0:18:13.200
<v Speaker 2>than anything else. Do you feel like that's a detriment

0:18:13.280 --> 0:18:15.080
<v Speaker 2>to the Socks at all in terms of where they

0:18:15.119 --> 0:18:16.720
<v Speaker 2>stand right now or do you still feel like, hey,

0:18:17.480 --> 0:18:21.440
<v Speaker 2>they can still put together competitive packages for the deadline.

0:18:21.880 --> 0:18:25.360
<v Speaker 3>I mean that they've got some names that are some

0:18:25.400 --> 0:18:28.280
<v Speaker 3>guys that are that kind of fit that demographic. But

0:18:28.560 --> 0:18:31.080
<v Speaker 3>if that is what sellers are looking for, then that

0:18:31.160 --> 0:18:33.119
<v Speaker 3>does kind of put us a little bit behind. You know,

0:18:33.200 --> 0:18:36.320
<v Speaker 3>we like recently we've been doing a little bit better

0:18:36.359 --> 0:18:39.040
<v Speaker 3>at drafting you know, guys out of high school, and like,

0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:45.280
<v Speaker 3>you know, we just completely overhauled our international scouting system,

0:18:45.480 --> 0:18:50.200
<v Speaker 3>David Keller running it now, but we've already had several

0:18:50.440 --> 0:18:53.520
<v Speaker 3>international classes in place before he even took uh took

0:18:53.600 --> 0:18:56.760
<v Speaker 3>that job, so we're still a little bit behind in

0:18:56.840 --> 0:19:00.240
<v Speaker 3>that department. There's been a few breakout guys in the

0:19:00.240 --> 0:19:03.360
<v Speaker 3>Dominican Summer League, but like those are all like that's

0:19:03.400 --> 0:19:05.919
<v Speaker 3>almost like so far away that you really don't know

0:19:06.040 --> 0:19:09.520
<v Speaker 3>much about some of those guys, So I'm not sure

0:19:09.640 --> 0:19:14.080
<v Speaker 3>how much trade value they'll specifically have. Most of the

0:19:14.080 --> 0:19:15.840
<v Speaker 3>guys that we have, like I said, are going to

0:19:15.880 --> 0:19:18.919
<v Speaker 3>be like middle and fielders and like high like between

0:19:18.960 --> 0:19:21.199
<v Speaker 3>low Way and Double A, that are going to be

0:19:21.280 --> 0:19:26.000
<v Speaker 3>like our primary trade ships some I mean, but like

0:19:26.080 --> 0:19:28.440
<v Speaker 3>at if we're talking about like the very top of

0:19:29.160 --> 0:19:32.040
<v Speaker 3>what we have available, we can put together trade pacts

0:19:32.080 --> 0:19:34.080
<v Speaker 3>for anyone because those two guys that we have at

0:19:34.080 --> 0:19:36.640
<v Speaker 3>the top of our of I guess if you were

0:19:36.680 --> 0:19:41.120
<v Speaker 3>to rank our trade ships, it's Caleb Bonomer and Billy Carlson,

0:19:41.400 --> 0:19:44.240
<v Speaker 3>both are twenty years old and younger, and both are

0:19:45.080 --> 0:19:49.160
<v Speaker 3>pretty pretty unanimously considered top bunch of prospects. I mean,

0:19:49.240 --> 0:19:51.720
<v Speaker 3>Bonhomer is probably a top twenty prospect at this point.

0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:54.560
<v Speaker 3>Carlson I think is in the fifties right now in

0:19:54.720 --> 0:19:58.000
<v Speaker 3>MLB pipeline. I know we fell off of Baseball America's list,

0:19:58.119 --> 0:20:00.959
<v Speaker 3>but that's more because the injury versus he's actually playing.

0:20:02.480 --> 0:20:05.120
<v Speaker 3>So like those those two guys alone can pretty much

0:20:05.240 --> 0:20:07.359
<v Speaker 3>like if we're willing to move them, which is a

0:20:07.400 --> 0:20:11.159
<v Speaker 3>big if, could put us in any conversation really and

0:20:11.200 --> 0:20:13.119
<v Speaker 3>then we do have a good amount of depth in

0:20:13.200 --> 0:20:15.359
<v Speaker 3>the system. It just depends on, like you said, if

0:20:15.400 --> 0:20:17.560
<v Speaker 3>teams are looking for more those like eighteen nineteen year

0:20:17.560 --> 0:20:21.760
<v Speaker 3>old like high upside, high risk guys, that might put

0:20:21.800 --> 0:20:23.720
<v Speaker 3>us at a little bit of a disadvantage. We have

0:20:23.760 --> 0:20:26.600
<v Speaker 3>a few guys, but it's not exactly where we're the

0:20:26.640 --> 0:20:27.320
<v Speaker 3>strongest at.

0:20:28.600 --> 0:20:30.760
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, so kind of taking the other side of that, Michael,

0:20:30.840 --> 0:20:33.120
<v Speaker 4>are there any guys I mean, obviously you mentioned Bonhamber

0:20:33.160 --> 0:20:35.480
<v Speaker 4>and Carlson, but are there any other players that you

0:20:35.520 --> 0:20:39.320
<v Speaker 4>think the White Sox should essentially refuse to trade? And uh,

0:20:39.400 --> 0:20:41.199
<v Speaker 4>maybe you can talk about Boston Smith here, I here

0:20:41.240 --> 0:20:41.959
<v Speaker 4>feeling for it.

0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:44.720
<v Speaker 1>I knew you're gonna ask me about that.

0:20:46.160 --> 0:20:51.359
<v Speaker 3>My personal take is no prospect truly be untouchable, but

0:20:51.560 --> 0:20:54.560
<v Speaker 3>like you gotta have, you gotta have limits on that

0:20:54.640 --> 0:20:57.240
<v Speaker 3>as well, Like I'm not putting Caleb Bonmer in every

0:20:57.280 --> 0:21:02.320
<v Speaker 3>single you know, trade conversation, Like, if we're gonna consider

0:21:02.440 --> 0:21:04.560
<v Speaker 3>trading him, it's got to be for Like I don't

0:21:04.600 --> 0:21:07.200
<v Speaker 3>even know if anyone who's been rumored to be available

0:21:07.200 --> 0:21:09.880
<v Speaker 3>even fits the criteria for what we could trade him for.

0:21:10.320 --> 0:21:13.800
<v Speaker 3>Like I'd be looking at like a frontline starter with

0:21:13.960 --> 0:21:17.760
<v Speaker 3>at least another three years of control, Like I just

0:21:17.800 --> 0:21:21.240
<v Speaker 3>don't know, Like unless maybe if the Reds decided to

0:21:21.280 --> 0:21:23.800
<v Speaker 3>shop Hunter Green, like that could be a fit. But

0:21:24.000 --> 0:21:26.679
<v Speaker 3>like I really don't know if there's a trade that

0:21:26.720 --> 0:21:31.879
<v Speaker 3>makes sense for him Carlson, Like again, he's not quite

0:21:32.119 --> 0:21:35.679
<v Speaker 3>Caleb Bomber's level, but like you still would You're not

0:21:35.720 --> 0:21:38.199
<v Speaker 3>gonna trade him for a rental, you know, unless they

0:21:38.240 --> 0:21:41.600
<v Speaker 3>were like adamant about getting Scooble, which I think would

0:21:41.640 --> 0:21:44.240
<v Speaker 3>be the wrong decision for the White Sox. Like that,

0:21:44.359 --> 0:21:48.040
<v Speaker 3>I don't think that makes sense. We'll talk about Boston

0:21:48.080 --> 0:21:52.359
<v Speaker 3>Smith a little bit here because he does provide some

0:21:52.440 --> 0:21:56.080
<v Speaker 3>interesting catcher depth for the White Sox currently, Like the

0:21:56.080 --> 0:21:59.360
<v Speaker 3>way he's flying up the system is like, it's crazy

0:21:59.400 --> 0:22:02.240
<v Speaker 3>how good he's been this year and the fact that

0:22:02.280 --> 0:22:06.159
<v Speaker 3>he's playing into a position war maybe he could possibly

0:22:06.200 --> 0:22:09.600
<v Speaker 3>help out the roster next year or potentially this year

0:22:09.640 --> 0:22:13.159
<v Speaker 3>with how bad our catching situation has been. Maybe that

0:22:13.240 --> 0:22:16.760
<v Speaker 3>does carry more value than trading. Than looking to trade him.

0:22:18.000 --> 0:22:21.359
<v Speaker 3>I think that he should still be available in the

0:22:21.440 --> 0:22:25.639
<v Speaker 3>right trade personally, but like what does that right trade

0:22:25.640 --> 0:22:27.920
<v Speaker 3>look like? I'm not exactly sure, but like you kind

0:22:27.920 --> 0:22:31.760
<v Speaker 3>of have TOI outweigh like what could he bring back

0:22:31.840 --> 0:22:35.000
<v Speaker 3>versus what could he potentially bring to this team this year.

0:22:35.119 --> 0:22:39.520
<v Speaker 3>So again, no one should be untouchable, but like you

0:22:40.080 --> 0:22:42.840
<v Speaker 3>really have to figure out, like does it make sense

0:22:42.840 --> 0:22:43.440
<v Speaker 3>for that trade.

0:22:45.080 --> 0:22:48.600
<v Speaker 2>One thing too, I'll say about just prospects in general

0:22:48.880 --> 0:22:51.920
<v Speaker 2>and trade. Talking general comes from something someone mentioned the

0:22:52.000 --> 0:22:56.879
<v Speaker 2>chat about Alec Briley about a potential trade chip for

0:22:56.920 --> 0:22:59.560
<v Speaker 2>the Sacks. I think it's starting ends with the fact

0:22:59.560 --> 0:23:01.720
<v Speaker 2>that at White Sox with three you mentioned this, he's

0:23:01.760 --> 0:23:03.760
<v Speaker 2>twenty five years old, right, Like he's twenty five in

0:23:03.800 --> 0:23:06.679
<v Speaker 2>double lights. That's the sort of thing that the team's

0:23:06.760 --> 0:23:11.280
<v Speaker 2>not looking for, right like. Unfortunately, that's why the Caleb

0:23:11.280 --> 0:23:13.840
<v Speaker 2>Bonners continue to come up, or even Burgoya comes up

0:23:14.359 --> 0:23:18.600
<v Speaker 2>every now and again. It's just it's so hard to

0:23:19.520 --> 0:23:22.560
<v Speaker 2>project guys. Yes, but the older they get, saying someone's

0:23:22.560 --> 0:23:24.920
<v Speaker 2>old at twenty five, it just hurts now that I'm

0:23:25.080 --> 0:23:29.040
<v Speaker 2>twenty nine. Just to be completely clear about this, But

0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:34.119
<v Speaker 2>the older older guys get, the less valuable they seem

0:23:34.240 --> 0:23:38.240
<v Speaker 2>at the deadline, which is unfortunate, but it plays into

0:23:38.359 --> 0:23:40.959
<v Speaker 2>Michael your point of like, I just don't think anybody

0:23:40.960 --> 0:23:44.640
<v Speaker 2>should be untouchable. You don't need to make a move

0:23:44.720 --> 0:23:48.080
<v Speaker 2>just to make a move, But I've watched too many

0:23:48.119 --> 0:23:51.879
<v Speaker 2>prospects crash and burn, like at a certain point you

0:23:51.920 --> 0:23:55.120
<v Speaker 2>got a trade for a sure thing, which I guess

0:23:55.119 --> 0:23:57.240
<v Speaker 2>though when we've talked about this a little bit, the

0:23:57.520 --> 0:24:00.600
<v Speaker 2>player development system being better for the White Sox certainly

0:24:00.600 --> 0:24:04.159
<v Speaker 2>helps that, I guess is a question for anybody. Is

0:24:04.200 --> 0:24:08.159
<v Speaker 2>there a team we all think makes as a good

0:24:08.280 --> 0:24:12.680
<v Speaker 2>trade deadline partner for the Socks just because of who

0:24:12.680 --> 0:24:14.440
<v Speaker 2>they have or what they might be willing to take away.

0:24:14.480 --> 0:24:17.360
<v Speaker 2>I guess, Mill, either you or anyone who has any

0:24:17.400 --> 0:24:18.200
<v Speaker 2>thoughts on that one.

0:24:18.280 --> 0:24:23.360
<v Speaker 1>Well, well, just based las based on the fact that

0:24:23.880 --> 0:24:26.960
<v Speaker 1>your point of how many prospects crash and burned, nobody

0:24:27.000 --> 0:24:30.480
<v Speaker 1>should be untouchable. Nothing's a sure thing. I mean, I

0:24:30.520 --> 0:24:33.240
<v Speaker 1>mean San Diego, they're always willing to do business with us, right,

0:24:33.440 --> 0:24:38.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean we can get that James Shields type picture tomorrow.

0:24:38.800 --> 0:24:45.240
<v Speaker 2>Right, Listen, you know it's just yeah, Sandio is a

0:24:45.240 --> 0:24:48.280
<v Speaker 2>good answer. I didn't love the James Shields piece, but

0:24:48.320 --> 0:24:52.920
<v Speaker 2>Sandig is a good answer. I don't know. It's a

0:24:52.960 --> 0:24:54.439
<v Speaker 2>difficult one to figure out, truly.

0:24:55.080 --> 0:24:57.399
<v Speaker 1>The only point I'm trying to make is like, we

0:24:57.440 --> 0:25:00.280
<v Speaker 1>can't trade with reckless abandonment. I guess is about way

0:25:00.280 --> 0:25:02.040
<v Speaker 1>to put it. Guys should be available, but we have

0:25:02.119 --> 0:25:02.960
<v Speaker 1>to value them.

0:25:02.760 --> 0:25:05.760
<v Speaker 2>Correctly, correct right, And I kind of got what you

0:25:05.800 --> 0:25:08.919
<v Speaker 2>were putting putting out there. Yeah, it's not make a

0:25:08.960 --> 0:25:12.680
<v Speaker 2>move to make a move, it just be careful as

0:25:12.720 --> 0:25:16.960
<v Speaker 2>you're doing it. I guess, long story short, go.

0:25:16.960 --> 0:25:18.679
<v Speaker 1>Ahead, Michael, I know you're dying to answer it.

0:25:20.080 --> 0:25:23.280
<v Speaker 3>I mean, if we're really trying to get Mason Miller,

0:25:23.320 --> 0:25:25.560
<v Speaker 3>I guess the Padres could make sense, but I don't

0:25:25.600 --> 0:25:29.040
<v Speaker 3>actually think that's going to happen. The one team that

0:25:30.440 --> 0:25:35.000
<v Speaker 3>I keep going back to is the Angels, and they

0:25:35.000 --> 0:25:38.399
<v Speaker 3>do weird stuff every trade deadline, so like who knows

0:25:38.440 --> 0:25:40.600
<v Speaker 3>like what they're actually going to do this year. But

0:25:41.680 --> 0:25:43.960
<v Speaker 3>redet Meers is the guy that I've just had circled

0:25:43.960 --> 0:25:47.639
<v Speaker 3>this entire time. That just makes too much sense if

0:25:47.720 --> 0:25:53.480
<v Speaker 3>they're willing to make that kind of move and he's

0:25:53.480 --> 0:25:56.760
<v Speaker 3>not going to cost bondom or I don't think. Probably

0:25:56.800 --> 0:25:59.840
<v Speaker 3>a package around Billy Carlson, which we have so much

0:26:00.119 --> 0:26:02.359
<v Speaker 3>up in the middle and field, like you got to

0:26:02.400 --> 0:26:06.320
<v Speaker 3>be open to that. Recent reports have also talked about

0:26:06.359 --> 0:26:11.320
<v Speaker 3>them being interested in acquiring a young catcher. Could they

0:26:11.359 --> 0:26:15.400
<v Speaker 3>be interested in reacquiring a former catcher in the form

0:26:15.400 --> 0:26:18.240
<v Speaker 3>of Edgar Carro since it sounds like the White Sox

0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:21.640
<v Speaker 3>are looking to add to their catching room anyways, is

0:26:21.760 --> 0:26:25.000
<v Speaker 3>that something they would be open to. I don't know.

0:26:25.800 --> 0:26:28.639
<v Speaker 3>It's just something that does kind of line up. And

0:26:29.640 --> 0:26:31.639
<v Speaker 3>I don't know how much they'd even value Kara at

0:26:31.640 --> 0:26:35.920
<v Speaker 3>this point, but he is still a young player with upside.

0:26:36.480 --> 0:26:37.960
<v Speaker 1>They don't have much.

0:26:37.880 --> 0:26:42.520
<v Speaker 3>Long term for a catcher of the future option, like

0:26:42.560 --> 0:26:46.439
<v Speaker 3>as a secondary piece, Maybe something around Billy Carlson and

0:26:46.560 --> 0:26:50.520
<v Speaker 3>Edgar Caro does make sense. For Redetmers, who not only

0:26:50.560 --> 0:26:53.399
<v Speaker 3>gives us, you know, a guy that can sit in

0:26:53.440 --> 0:26:55.639
<v Speaker 3>the upper half of our rotation this year, but is

0:26:55.680 --> 0:26:58.160
<v Speaker 3>also controllable for another two years and kind of fits

0:26:58.200 --> 0:27:00.960
<v Speaker 3>our timeline a little better. So that that's just the

0:27:00.960 --> 0:27:03.840
<v Speaker 3>one that keeps coming back to me, like if they're

0:27:03.880 --> 0:27:07.760
<v Speaker 3>willing to make that bigger, splashing move, like that just

0:27:07.840 --> 0:27:08.840
<v Speaker 3>makes so much sense.

0:27:10.359 --> 0:27:13.320
<v Speaker 2>One thing I'm interested into you mentioned the Angels is

0:27:15.920 --> 0:27:18.639
<v Speaker 2>the Socks could use one more right handed bat that

0:27:18.720 --> 0:27:20.760
<v Speaker 2>plays outfield. I think it's been mentioned a couple of times.

0:27:20.800 --> 0:27:24.320
<v Speaker 2>I think I don't know how long this Tristan Peter's

0:27:26.000 --> 0:27:29.520
<v Speaker 2>kind of mini slump will last. But you're always worried then,

0:27:29.560 --> 0:27:31.000
<v Speaker 2>I think, Nick, we've talked about them a ton of

0:27:31.040 --> 0:27:34.240
<v Speaker 2>the expected stats don't exactly line up consistently with Peters.

0:27:34.680 --> 0:27:39.800
<v Speaker 2>You're always worried that Midnight strikes at some point for him.

0:27:41.040 --> 0:27:44.560
<v Speaker 2>I wonder if Joe Adelle becomes available for the Angels

0:27:44.560 --> 0:27:48.560
<v Speaker 2>as well, just does one thing well and it's hits

0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:50.760
<v Speaker 2>right handed pitching, or it hits left handed pitching as

0:27:50.760 --> 0:27:53.679
<v Speaker 2>a right hander, maybe that's something that they decide to

0:27:53.680 --> 0:27:55.960
<v Speaker 2>explore too. I think that's where the angels could make

0:27:55.960 --> 0:28:02.199
<v Speaker 2>sense beyond just Detmer's or sorry on I think this

0:28:02.280 --> 0:28:03.840
<v Speaker 2>question makes the most sense on the frame of how

0:28:03.840 --> 0:28:06.840
<v Speaker 2>many how many guys can you knock off at once? Right?

0:28:07.080 --> 0:28:07.199
<v Speaker 3>Like?

0:28:08.080 --> 0:28:09.680
<v Speaker 2>If I can go to the Mets and say, let's

0:28:09.720 --> 0:28:14.399
<v Speaker 2>get Weaver and Holmes and maybe a bat, like, how

0:28:14.400 --> 0:28:17.160
<v Speaker 2>many things can pull from there? Yeah, Louise Frock exactly

0:28:17.400 --> 0:28:19.239
<v Speaker 2>how many bad? How many things can I pull from

0:28:19.280 --> 0:28:21.720
<v Speaker 2>a team or the Reds like everyone's been talking about,

0:28:21.720 --> 0:28:24.720
<v Speaker 2>like Singer and Stevenson, right, Like, how many guys can

0:28:24.720 --> 0:28:27.160
<v Speaker 2>I pull from one trade? Even due to your point,

0:28:27.160 --> 0:28:29.159
<v Speaker 2>the Padres kind of feel that maybe a reliever, and

0:28:29.760 --> 0:28:32.440
<v Speaker 2>they've talked about Michael King as well potentially being available.

0:28:32.480 --> 0:28:35.359
<v Speaker 2>So I don't know, it just depends on what everyone

0:28:35.440 --> 0:28:36.320
<v Speaker 2>thinks might be best.

0:28:38.840 --> 0:28:42.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I guess, like what Michael would you consider? I

0:28:42.120 --> 0:28:43.880
<v Speaker 1>guess any of you can answer this what would be

0:28:43.880 --> 0:28:48.040
<v Speaker 1>considered a successful trade deadline? I'm very much on board

0:28:48.040 --> 0:28:51.000
<v Speaker 1>with the red Detmer's idea. I feel like I've been

0:28:51.080 --> 0:28:53.600
<v Speaker 1>perfectly clear on that. I did see somebody in the

0:28:53.680 --> 0:28:58.120
<v Speaker 1>chat bring up Holmes from the Mets. I think the

0:28:58.120 --> 0:29:01.280
<v Speaker 1>only thing that would worry anybody would just be the

0:29:01.320 --> 0:29:04.640
<v Speaker 1>timeline of him coming back from injury, but obviously his

0:29:04.760 --> 0:29:08.800
<v Speaker 1>body work speaks for itself. Like what is an ideal

0:29:08.800 --> 0:29:10.720
<v Speaker 1>trade deadline for You don't even need to say names

0:29:10.720 --> 0:29:12.640
<v Speaker 1>of the players you acquire, it's just what do we

0:29:12.680 --> 0:29:13.880
<v Speaker 1>need to address?

0:29:14.800 --> 0:29:18.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean for me, like you have to get

0:29:18.080 --> 0:29:21.280
<v Speaker 3>a starting pitcher that you actually trust in the playoffs

0:29:21.320 --> 0:29:23.920
<v Speaker 3>ahead of Anthony Kay and Eric Fetti. I think that's

0:29:24.000 --> 0:29:28.040
<v Speaker 3>prior to number one. I think you probably have to

0:29:28.320 --> 0:29:31.320
<v Speaker 3>acquire at least one more reliever. It doesn't have to

0:29:31.320 --> 0:29:33.400
<v Speaker 3>be a closer, but like it has to be someone

0:29:33.440 --> 0:29:35.920
<v Speaker 3>that you can trust in the sixth or seventh inning.

0:29:37.200 --> 0:29:39.880
<v Speaker 3>And for me, I think you got to get a catcher,

0:29:40.320 --> 0:29:44.840
<v Speaker 3>something that resembles a competent catcher, because we just haven't

0:29:44.840 --> 0:29:46.360
<v Speaker 3>had much of that this year. And I know it

0:29:46.400 --> 0:29:48.680
<v Speaker 3>hasn't hurt us this year, but I think it's something

0:29:48.720 --> 0:29:51.000
<v Speaker 3>we have to acquire. I'm not saying it has to

0:29:51.040 --> 0:29:53.920
<v Speaker 3>be shay lngliers is out and out. I'm not saying

0:29:53.920 --> 0:29:56.880
<v Speaker 3>it has to be like some all star catcher, but

0:29:57.000 --> 0:30:02.920
<v Speaker 3>just someone that can actually be a net post for us.

0:30:04.560 --> 0:30:07.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm on a similar path where it just hey, get somebody,

0:30:08.120 --> 0:30:10.960
<v Speaker 2>get somebody that fills each of those pieces, right, Like,

0:30:11.240 --> 0:30:15.680
<v Speaker 2>I'm not expecting anything flashy. I'm really not, because partially

0:30:15.680 --> 0:30:17.160
<v Speaker 2>because of what I mentioned earlier Micha, when we were

0:30:17.160 --> 0:30:21.520
<v Speaker 2>talking about like prospect capital, like socks have some intriguing pieces,

0:30:21.520 --> 0:30:23.960
<v Speaker 2>but I don't know if that's exactly what teams tend

0:30:23.960 --> 0:30:27.560
<v Speaker 2>to trade for at the deadline. Like trade trades at

0:30:27.560 --> 0:30:31.360
<v Speaker 2>the deadline are weird. They're not if you try and

0:30:31.680 --> 0:30:33.400
<v Speaker 2>evaluate them in the same way you do like an

0:30:33.480 --> 0:30:37.840
<v Speaker 2>off season trade, You're you're not gonna get the same

0:30:38.000 --> 0:30:40.720
<v Speaker 2>idea behind it. Huge guys don't move a lot of times,

0:30:41.160 --> 0:30:46.160
<v Speaker 2>huge bats don't move, and the huge prospect bats don't

0:30:46.160 --> 0:30:52.240
<v Speaker 2>move at the deadline, Like it's very hard to figure

0:30:52.240 --> 0:30:56.680
<v Speaker 2>out what's available to Like someone's mentioned in the chat,

0:30:56.720 --> 0:30:58.680
<v Speaker 2>like a bunch of guys from the Orioles. I don't

0:30:58.680 --> 0:31:02.280
<v Speaker 2>think the Oriols are ready to sell. They're not that

0:31:02.440 --> 0:31:07.320
<v Speaker 2>far away. Like even that al Wes like five hundred

0:31:07.400 --> 0:31:10.000
<v Speaker 2>is pretty much keeping you in that division. The trade

0:31:10.040 --> 0:31:12.280
<v Speaker 2>deadline is so hard because so many teams can make

0:31:13.080 --> 0:31:18.440
<v Speaker 2>a can make an argument. I guess to stay in it, right, Like,

0:31:18.840 --> 0:31:21.320
<v Speaker 2>It's it's very hard, and I think this year is

0:31:21.360 --> 0:31:25.000
<v Speaker 2>going to be a certain seller's market, and you're going

0:31:25.080 --> 0:31:27.920
<v Speaker 2>to be very happy if you're selling guys off, because

0:31:27.960 --> 0:31:30.440
<v Speaker 2>there are few teams that are really committed to doing that,

0:31:31.080 --> 0:31:34.680
<v Speaker 2>and I think prices are going to skyrocket, and that's

0:31:34.680 --> 0:31:37.000
<v Speaker 2>where I'm like, I just don't know. For the Socks.

0:31:37.000 --> 0:31:40.840
<v Speaker 2>If it's in the cards with with where their prospect

0:31:40.880 --> 0:31:44.600
<v Speaker 2>capital is, I'd maybe feel better about it in another year,

0:31:45.080 --> 0:31:45.920
<v Speaker 2>if that makes sense.

0:31:46.960 --> 0:31:49.239
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, these are good points. I mean, if I had

0:31:49.240 --> 0:31:51.200
<v Speaker 4>to rank it, I would say my number one Waih

0:31:51.320 --> 0:31:54.720
<v Speaker 4>is a starting pitcher, honestly. Second, I'd probably catcher, just

0:31:54.760 --> 0:31:58.040
<v Speaker 4>because I'm so tired of our catchers. And then third

0:31:58.080 --> 0:32:00.520
<v Speaker 4>would be like another starting pitcher I'd actually like more

0:32:00.600 --> 0:32:03.560
<v Speaker 4>than my fourth wish, which would be a reliever. The

0:32:03.600 --> 0:32:05.480
<v Speaker 4>only thing on relievers that I'll say really quick is

0:32:05.520 --> 0:32:10.200
<v Speaker 4>that if you really do have like Hagen Smith and

0:32:10.320 --> 0:32:13.440
<v Speaker 4>Tanner McDougal potentially joining the Major League bullpen, and then

0:32:13.440 --> 0:32:15.680
<v Speaker 4>you have other guys down to like erie Arte and

0:32:16.040 --> 0:32:17.760
<v Speaker 4>wig them and Gonzales and I think there's one more

0:32:17.800 --> 0:32:20.000
<v Speaker 4>on triple A was kind of intriguing, like, yeah, you

0:32:20.080 --> 0:32:22.000
<v Speaker 4>still like I would like the Major League bullpen to

0:32:22.000 --> 0:32:23.480
<v Speaker 4>be and Freud, but you still have a lot of

0:32:23.480 --> 0:32:26.960
<v Speaker 4>internal options that you don't necessarily have at catcher or

0:32:27.000 --> 0:32:30.120
<v Speaker 4>a starting pitcher unless you really like Mason Adams or Sandling.

0:32:30.320 --> 0:32:34.400
<v Speaker 4>So that's why I would frame it that way. But basically,

0:32:34.400 --> 0:32:36.920
<v Speaker 4>just pitching help, that's the main thing I want.

0:32:37.920 --> 0:32:39.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, we need a We're gonna need a short term

0:32:39.960 --> 0:32:44.320
<v Speaker 1>answer for Kyle Teal at the very least, just based

0:32:44.320 --> 0:32:47.480
<v Speaker 1>on where we are we are with catcher, preferably a

0:32:47.520 --> 0:32:49.840
<v Speaker 1>guy that wouldn't rush Teal back into the swing of

0:32:49.920 --> 0:32:53.640
<v Speaker 1>things if that's the route we want to go. Honestly,

0:32:53.800 --> 0:32:56.360
<v Speaker 1>for anybody on a good catcher discussion, I highly recommend

0:32:56.360 --> 0:32:58.640
<v Speaker 1>listening to the last pod we did, because we went

0:32:58.760 --> 0:33:01.040
<v Speaker 1>we went pretty good in a detail about kind of

0:33:01.080 --> 0:33:04.520
<v Speaker 1>the different catchers that are on the deadline, really good

0:33:04.600 --> 0:33:08.840
<v Speaker 1>pool of them, and some rentals who probably wouldn't cost

0:33:08.840 --> 0:33:11.920
<v Speaker 1>an arm and a leg to grab up either. But

0:33:12.040 --> 0:33:14.480
<v Speaker 1>there's also the discussion, and I don't want to get

0:33:14.480 --> 0:33:16.479
<v Speaker 1>into it right now, because that turned into a big

0:33:16.560 --> 0:33:19.840
<v Speaker 1>discussion on the last pod, was do you take the

0:33:19.880 --> 0:33:23.200
<v Speaker 1>long term approach and you go and really take a

0:33:23.200 --> 0:33:27.400
<v Speaker 1>serious look at it, like a Shay Langelier's For the record,

0:33:27.400 --> 0:33:30.440
<v Speaker 1>I don't think Adley Rodgman's going anywhere, but the Orioles

0:33:30.480 --> 0:33:34.880
<v Speaker 1>are terribly run organization anyway, so who knows. But anyway, LEAs,

0:33:35.400 --> 0:33:39.480
<v Speaker 1>I believe you have taken the rain on fan questions tonight.

0:33:40.320 --> 0:33:42.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so thank you to everyone who sent them in.

0:33:42.360 --> 0:33:45.120
<v Speaker 2>We're monitoring the chat. I'm gonna try and add those

0:33:45.120 --> 0:33:46.360
<v Speaker 2>in as well. We're gonna try to get to as

0:33:46.400 --> 0:33:48.320
<v Speaker 2>many as we can in a reasonable amount of time

0:33:50.360 --> 0:33:52.400
<v Speaker 2>we have. We're gonna start with some of the ones

0:33:52.400 --> 0:33:56.120
<v Speaker 2>that folks sent in ahead of time, and some folks

0:33:56.760 --> 0:34:00.840
<v Speaker 2>asked similar questions, so hopefully you're feels like he had

0:34:00.880 --> 0:34:05.360
<v Speaker 2>it covered. If I butcher your name, sorry, I will

0:34:05.360 --> 0:34:08.320
<v Speaker 2>do my best. We will start with this question from

0:34:08.480 --> 0:34:11.600
<v Speaker 2>b Pasaia and I believe white sox eric on X

0:34:11.640 --> 0:34:14.799
<v Speaker 2>also asked this one as well. One of us will

0:34:14.800 --> 0:34:16.759
<v Speaker 2>take all of these questions. So do you think we

0:34:16.800 --> 0:34:19.080
<v Speaker 2>should take on money in a trade to send back

0:34:19.440 --> 0:34:22.719
<v Speaker 2>less prospect capital And I think we're letting our prospect

0:34:22.840 --> 0:34:27.360
<v Speaker 2>expert Michael kind of take that. Yeah.

0:34:27.400 --> 0:34:30.279
<v Speaker 3>So this this was a little bit of a discussion

0:34:30.320 --> 0:34:34.919
<v Speaker 3>on Twitter recently because of a recent article from Bob

0:34:35.000 --> 0:34:38.319
<v Speaker 3>Nightingale talking about the Socks may not be willing to

0:34:38.320 --> 0:34:41.480
<v Speaker 3>trade one of their top prospects, but they may be

0:34:41.560 --> 0:34:45.800
<v Speaker 3>willing to eat some money in order to lessen the

0:34:46.680 --> 0:34:50.080
<v Speaker 3>return that they would have to give up for someone

0:34:50.120 --> 0:34:50.760
<v Speaker 3>in a trade.

0:34:51.280 --> 0:34:52.160
<v Speaker 2>And there was a lot of.

0:34:52.120 --> 0:34:55.320
<v Speaker 3>Pushback on that, like like, don't be prospect hugging, Like

0:34:55.360 --> 0:34:58.440
<v Speaker 3>what are you doing? Like if the White Sox are

0:34:58.440 --> 0:35:00.880
<v Speaker 3>willing to eat some money to get an actual upgrade

0:35:00.880 --> 0:35:04.279
<v Speaker 3>on this roster, why wouldn't we want them to do that?

0:35:05.120 --> 0:35:07.839
<v Speaker 3>Like we've been complaining about this team cheaping out for

0:35:07.880 --> 0:35:10.200
<v Speaker 3>so long. It feels like if they're actually going to

0:35:11.000 --> 0:35:15.200
<v Speaker 3>open up the checkbook and go out and say this

0:35:15.480 --> 0:35:18.680
<v Speaker 3>picture can be a third starter for us. But the

0:35:18.760 --> 0:35:21.000
<v Speaker 3>team wants to get a salary off the books, Sure

0:35:21.040 --> 0:35:22.719
<v Speaker 3>we'll eat a salary so we don't have to give

0:35:22.800 --> 0:35:25.719
<v Speaker 3>up a lot of prospect capital. Like that makes too

0:35:25.840 --> 0:35:28.200
<v Speaker 3>much sense to me if that kind of trade is

0:35:28.239 --> 0:35:31.680
<v Speaker 3>on the table. I don't know exactly if that trade

0:35:31.719 --> 0:35:34.320
<v Speaker 3>will be on the table, but like, there's a couple

0:35:34.360 --> 0:35:38.120
<v Speaker 3>guys who are under some expensive contracts beyond this year,

0:35:38.160 --> 0:35:39.799
<v Speaker 3>a couple like just off the top of my head

0:35:39.800 --> 0:35:41.799
<v Speaker 3>that I can think of our Michael King from the

0:35:41.840 --> 0:35:45.640
<v Speaker 3>Padres and Luis Castill from the Mariners, like maybe their

0:35:45.680 --> 0:35:50.440
<v Speaker 3>teams want to get out of those contracts, Like most

0:35:50.480 --> 0:35:52.960
<v Speaker 3>teams aren't gonna be willing to take on those full contracts.

0:35:53.040 --> 0:35:56.920
<v Speaker 3>The White Sox have nothing, like basically nothing tied up

0:35:56.920 --> 0:35:59.480
<v Speaker 3>in terms of salary over the next few years. Why

0:35:59.520 --> 0:36:01.759
<v Speaker 3>wouldn't you take advantage of that if it means like

0:36:02.000 --> 0:36:05.680
<v Speaker 3>upgrading your roster for a minimal return, Like I get

0:36:05.719 --> 0:36:07.920
<v Speaker 3>the point that we don't want to be prospect huggers,

0:36:07.960 --> 0:36:11.320
<v Speaker 3>because frankly, that's why the Orioles windows shut so quickly,

0:36:11.360 --> 0:36:13.719
<v Speaker 3>because they wouldn't trade any of their decent prospects. And

0:36:13.719 --> 0:36:15.640
<v Speaker 3>I know you guys wanted to detail on that in

0:36:15.680 --> 0:36:18.520
<v Speaker 3>the last episode, but I don't want to end up

0:36:18.560 --> 0:36:21.560
<v Speaker 3>like that either. But why trade prospects if we don't

0:36:21.560 --> 0:36:23.759
<v Speaker 3>have to? Like, it just makes too much sense to

0:36:23.800 --> 0:36:26.000
<v Speaker 3>me to do something like that if if the other

0:36:26.040 --> 0:36:27.279
<v Speaker 3>team is willing to do that.

0:36:28.320 --> 0:36:30.080
<v Speaker 1>And it also helps that we happen to have an

0:36:30.120 --> 0:36:33.960
<v Speaker 1>owner who loves the term cash considerations more than anybody

0:36:33.960 --> 0:36:40.600
<v Speaker 1>else in sports. And honestly, Louis Castillo, I can very

0:36:40.680 --> 0:36:43.080
<v Speaker 1>much get on board with having to pay it, like go,

0:36:43.160 --> 0:36:45.960
<v Speaker 1>oh my gosh, break my heart to pay Luis Castillo

0:36:46.080 --> 0:36:46.480
<v Speaker 1>right now.

0:36:47.160 --> 0:36:49.680
<v Speaker 3>And he's he got off to a rough start this year,

0:36:49.680 --> 0:36:53.200
<v Speaker 3>but like he's been much better recently. Like I think

0:36:53.239 --> 0:36:56.319
<v Speaker 3>he has like a mid three era since like mid May,

0:36:56.440 --> 0:36:58.879
<v Speaker 3>so like he's pitching closer to like what his old

0:36:58.920 --> 0:37:02.280
<v Speaker 3>form is. Like he's not quite his prime Luis Castillo,

0:37:02.320 --> 0:37:04.480
<v Speaker 3>but like he'd still be a hell of up there

0:37:04.560 --> 0:37:06.439
<v Speaker 3>than Anthony Kay and Eric Fetti. And if we don't

0:37:06.440 --> 0:37:07.920
<v Speaker 3>have to give up much for him in terms of

0:37:07.920 --> 0:37:10.520
<v Speaker 3>prospect capital, again, why would.

0:37:10.239 --> 0:37:13.319
<v Speaker 1>You not do that? He's an absolute dog on the

0:37:13.320 --> 0:37:15.440
<v Speaker 1>mound too. If anybody can turn around and have like

0:37:15.719 --> 0:37:18.280
<v Speaker 1>a strong playoff run just kind of out of the blue,

0:37:18.400 --> 0:37:20.520
<v Speaker 1>it would be a guy like Luis Castillo. Yep.

0:37:22.440 --> 0:37:27.200
<v Speaker 2>Let's uh, let's talk next about a guy. Logan web

0:37:27.920 --> 0:37:33.200
<v Speaker 2>Jose De Santiago Colie on Facebook. What are the possibilities

0:37:33.200 --> 0:37:35.359
<v Speaker 2>of the White Sox landing logan web and how many

0:37:35.360 --> 0:37:37.440
<v Speaker 2>prospects will it take to get him one top one

0:37:37.520 --> 0:37:40.240
<v Speaker 2>hundred or what's the price? Basically he mentioned Noah Schultz

0:37:40.280 --> 0:37:44.000
<v Speaker 2>as well. Duke, I think you're gonna take this one.

0:37:44.040 --> 0:37:45.799
<v Speaker 2>I know you're a big logan Web guy, And I'll

0:37:45.800 --> 0:37:48.239
<v Speaker 2>ask kind of the follow up question on top of

0:37:48.280 --> 0:37:50.759
<v Speaker 2>this is are you willing to move Noah Schultz in

0:37:50.840 --> 0:37:53.720
<v Speaker 2>the right package, whether or not it's the Logan Web package.

0:37:55.000 --> 0:37:57.400
<v Speaker 1>Well, it's gonna have to. It's gonna take San Francisco

0:37:57.600 --> 0:38:01.000
<v Speaker 1>being willing to accept that they're kink, that they're willing

0:38:01.040 --> 0:38:03.000
<v Speaker 1>to give up a guy like Logan Web. This guy

0:38:03.000 --> 0:38:06.239
<v Speaker 1>who's going to be under control until about twenty twenty nine,

0:38:07.120 --> 0:38:11.360
<v Speaker 1>has a has a decent sized little contract. Honestly signed

0:38:11.360 --> 0:38:14.560
<v Speaker 1>it in twenty four or five years, ninety million, which

0:38:15.440 --> 0:38:17.120
<v Speaker 1>would actually be right up the ballpark of what the

0:38:17.120 --> 0:38:19.399
<v Speaker 1>white sex should be spending on a picture like Logan Web.

0:38:19.400 --> 0:38:22.640
<v Speaker 1>But you're gonna get consistency out of this guy every

0:38:22.680 --> 0:38:26.480
<v Speaker 1>single day. He's going to be the exact type of

0:38:26.600 --> 0:38:30.200
<v Speaker 1>picture you want in this rotation. Right now, he is

0:38:30.520 --> 0:38:34.399
<v Speaker 1>just consistency personified. Not a lot of strikeouts, doesn't get

0:38:34.480 --> 0:38:37.799
<v Speaker 1>hit hard, doesn't walk a ton of batters, has had

0:38:37.840 --> 0:38:40.600
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of a walk issues this year, but

0:38:40.719 --> 0:38:44.759
<v Speaker 1>something that can definitely get honed in. It's going to

0:38:44.840 --> 0:38:47.520
<v Speaker 1>depend on where San Francisco sees a roster. And I

0:38:47.520 --> 0:38:49.160
<v Speaker 1>also think a guy out of San Francisco too, you

0:38:49.160 --> 0:38:50.480
<v Speaker 1>should take a look at and we brought him up

0:38:50.520 --> 0:38:52.440
<v Speaker 1>on this podcast quite a bit Skuy like Robbie Ray.

0:38:53.320 --> 0:38:55.920
<v Speaker 1>So there there is discussions that should definitely happen in

0:38:55.960 --> 0:38:59.279
<v Speaker 1>San Francisco. As far as what they're going to pull

0:38:59.320 --> 0:39:01.759
<v Speaker 1>for a guy like Logan Web, it's gonna be tough

0:39:02.040 --> 0:39:05.200
<v Speaker 1>with that contract control. He's gonna definitely be the higher price.

0:39:05.280 --> 0:39:07.359
<v Speaker 1>They're definitely gonna be dangling a guy like Robbie Ray

0:39:07.400 --> 0:39:12.520
<v Speaker 1>instead of him. Honestly, I don't think this. I don't

0:39:12.560 --> 0:39:15.640
<v Speaker 1>see the unless unless the Socks really can get good

0:39:15.719 --> 0:39:18.799
<v Speaker 1>value for a team that like would really buy into

0:39:18.880 --> 0:39:22.719
<v Speaker 1>the development cycle, that's gonna be Noah Schultz. I don't

0:39:22.719 --> 0:39:25.080
<v Speaker 1>see him getting involved in too much in this trade deadline.

0:39:25.080 --> 0:39:27.640
<v Speaker 1>And I still feel like the Socks are still really

0:39:27.719 --> 0:39:29.960
<v Speaker 1>high on him despite what he's shown on the major

0:39:30.040 --> 0:39:35.719
<v Speaker 1>league level. But I do think top one hundred. I mean,

0:39:35.760 --> 0:39:37.520
<v Speaker 1>how many top one hundred prospects do we have in

0:39:37.520 --> 0:39:38.279
<v Speaker 1>the system right now?

0:39:38.400 --> 0:39:44.040
<v Speaker 3>Like I mean right now, if you're not including Rockchalowski

0:39:44.080 --> 0:39:47.040
<v Speaker 3>since he can't be traded, you really have two unanimous

0:39:47.120 --> 0:39:50.759
<v Speaker 3>ones that's uh, that's Bonimer and Billy Carlson. So though

0:39:50.800 --> 0:39:53.399
<v Speaker 3>that's pretty much it. I mean, Hagen Smith is still

0:39:53.440 --> 0:39:56.799
<v Speaker 3>technically on MLB pipeline, but I would be surprised if

0:39:56.800 --> 0:39:58.760
<v Speaker 3>he's still a top hunch of prospect when they actually

0:39:58.800 --> 0:39:59.360
<v Speaker 3>refresh that.

0:40:00.960 --> 0:40:03.960
<v Speaker 2>I think if you're moving a guy with control, you

0:40:04.080 --> 0:40:06.680
<v Speaker 2>have to be willing to move Bonomer straight up.

0:40:07.360 --> 0:40:09.480
<v Speaker 1>Or either Bontomer was the guy guy that kind of

0:40:09.520 --> 0:40:10.640
<v Speaker 1>came to mind.

0:40:11.400 --> 0:40:14.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, if you're getting guy with control, you're moving Bonomer.

0:40:16.040 --> 0:40:18.960
<v Speaker 2>I know it's a mixed opinion on moving Schultz. I

0:40:19.200 --> 0:40:21.800
<v Speaker 2>just it depends on and Duke we have this conversation,

0:40:21.840 --> 0:40:24.040
<v Speaker 2>depends on how long you think this development timeline is

0:40:24.080 --> 0:40:26.680
<v Speaker 2>for him. I happen to think it's maybe a little

0:40:26.680 --> 0:40:29.200
<v Speaker 2>bit longer than the average fan does. And I'm gonna say, yeah,

0:40:29.200 --> 0:40:33.000
<v Speaker 2>I'd move him if the right package came together. I'm

0:40:33.040 --> 0:40:36.319
<v Speaker 2>not moving him for a rental, obviously, but when you're

0:40:36.320 --> 0:40:41.160
<v Speaker 2>talking about years of control, you got to give up

0:40:41.160 --> 0:40:43.200
<v Speaker 2>a pretty penny and no matter who it is, and

0:40:43.480 --> 0:40:48.600
<v Speaker 2>especially like eighteen million on average for Loco webs contract

0:40:48.600 --> 0:40:52.240
<v Speaker 2>the next the two years of control, like yeah, that's

0:40:52.600 --> 0:40:56.359
<v Speaker 2>that's less than an a starter makes, so straight up,

0:40:56.360 --> 0:40:58.120
<v Speaker 2>you got you gotta be willing to pay for it.

0:40:58.239 --> 0:41:02.600
<v Speaker 2>So alright, we're gonna go to Dave Charline's question. If

0:41:02.640 --> 0:41:07.480
<v Speaker 2>I can find the right buttons to hit, there we go, Nick,

0:41:07.520 --> 0:41:09.200
<v Speaker 2>I think this one's going to you. I keep hearing

0:41:09.239 --> 0:41:11.480
<v Speaker 2>Mason Miller's name being linked to the Sacks. Personally, I

0:41:11.480 --> 0:41:13.439
<v Speaker 2>think he would be a lower priority than at least

0:41:13.440 --> 0:41:15.799
<v Speaker 2>one starter that has shown the ability to pitch deep

0:41:15.840 --> 0:41:18.160
<v Speaker 2>into games. Nick agreed, disagree.

0:41:19.040 --> 0:41:22.440
<v Speaker 4>I yeah, I mostly agree. There are a lot of

0:41:22.480 --> 0:41:25.959
<v Speaker 4>intricacies with the Mason Miller debate happening among white Sox

0:41:26.000 --> 0:41:29.320
<v Speaker 4>fans right now, and I do respect that it's obviously

0:41:29.320 --> 0:41:31.600
<v Speaker 4>not a repeat of Craig Camberrell, and that he's better

0:41:31.640 --> 0:41:34.920
<v Speaker 4>than Craig Camberrell. He's pretty much an automatic this season,

0:41:34.920 --> 0:41:37.120
<v Speaker 4>so you have to give him credit there. And of course,

0:41:37.200 --> 0:41:39.319
<v Speaker 4>unlike Kimberly still has several three and a half years

0:41:39.320 --> 0:41:42.000
<v Speaker 4>of control, whereas Kimball was a rental, so that's the

0:41:42.040 --> 0:41:45.720
<v Speaker 4>main difference there. However, that also means the prospect package

0:41:45.760 --> 0:41:48.080
<v Speaker 4>is going to be much much bigger. This is where

0:41:48.160 --> 0:41:50.520
<v Speaker 4>Caleb Bonhamer would almost certainly be included, would have to

0:41:50.560 --> 0:41:52.680
<v Speaker 4>be included, I should say, I don't even know if

0:41:52.680 --> 0:41:55.520
<v Speaker 4>a Billy Carlson headline package is enough for Mason Miller.

0:41:55.680 --> 0:41:57.640
<v Speaker 4>Give them what they Yeah, Michael agrees, given what they

0:41:57.680 --> 0:41:59.560
<v Speaker 4>traded to get for him last year. They traded a

0:41:59.600 --> 0:42:02.160
<v Speaker 4>top five prospects in baseball, so it probably would have

0:42:02.239 --> 0:42:05.080
<v Speaker 4>to be Bonham or plus plus. And there was a

0:42:05.120 --> 0:42:08.320
<v Speaker 4>comment in our chat from Uncle Ted who said that

0:42:08.320 --> 0:42:11.640
<v Speaker 4>he would rather have Adrian Murray Hone than Mason Miller, saying,

0:42:11.640 --> 0:42:14.200
<v Speaker 4>also on the padres another very good reliever, and he

0:42:14.239 --> 0:42:16.520
<v Speaker 4>would be a rental. So I'm actually in agreement with that,

0:42:16.880 --> 0:42:19.000
<v Speaker 4>even though Murray Hone is a lefty and we have

0:42:19.040 --> 0:42:21.520
<v Speaker 4>a lot of good lefties and the bullpen already still

0:42:21.640 --> 0:42:25.600
<v Speaker 4>just from a prospect capital standpoint, would agree there. But yeah,

0:42:25.640 --> 0:42:27.879
<v Speaker 4>the argument against it, or against me, I should say,

0:42:27.920 --> 0:42:30.319
<v Speaker 4>is just imagine Mason Miller in this bullpen you have.

0:42:30.640 --> 0:42:32.799
<v Speaker 4>He gets the ninth inning, you know, Grant Taylor gets

0:42:32.840 --> 0:42:34.640
<v Speaker 4>the eighth and or seventh. I like the game just

0:42:34.719 --> 0:42:36.640
<v Speaker 4>ends after the seventh inning, kind of like the Hendrix

0:42:36.719 --> 0:42:39.480
<v Speaker 4>kimberrel thing, at least in theory, not how it really

0:42:39.480 --> 0:42:41.719
<v Speaker 4>worked out, of course, but I get the allure of that.

0:42:42.080 --> 0:42:44.600
<v Speaker 4>I'm just too concerned about the starting pitching to say

0:42:44.600 --> 0:42:46.840
<v Speaker 4>that I want to cash all the chips in on

0:42:46.920 --> 0:42:48.759
<v Speaker 4>a ninth inning guy. That's why I'm saying, if we're

0:42:48.800 --> 0:42:50.799
<v Speaker 4>going to trade Bonhmer, I'd rather not. But if we're

0:42:50.800 --> 0:42:53.040
<v Speaker 4>going to trade Bonber, I'd rather be for a Logan

0:42:53.120 --> 0:42:56.360
<v Speaker 4>Web type than for a Mason Miller. But you know,

0:42:56.800 --> 0:42:59.520
<v Speaker 4>maybe you do a trade with the Padres. Maybe if

0:42:59.520 --> 0:43:01.799
<v Speaker 4>it is with me Samiller, than great. But maybe you

0:43:01.840 --> 0:43:03.399
<v Speaker 4>find a way to get some other guys thrown in,

0:43:03.440 --> 0:43:06.240
<v Speaker 4>like a Michael King or I always injured, like a Giorlito,

0:43:06.320 --> 0:43:07.759
<v Speaker 4>or somebody who could at least help you a little

0:43:07.760 --> 0:43:09.720
<v Speaker 4>bit on the starting side. That's like maybe the silver

0:43:09.800 --> 0:43:12.360
<v Speaker 4>lining if you want a starter. But overall, yeah, I

0:43:12.360 --> 0:43:15.560
<v Speaker 4>would be quite the cost to get Miller, And while

0:43:15.560 --> 0:43:19.680
<v Speaker 4>he is pretty much an automatic save, it's still a

0:43:19.800 --> 0:43:21.600
<v Speaker 4>very hefty cost when you have a lot of other needs.

0:43:21.600 --> 0:43:24.160
<v Speaker 1>In my opinion, for.

0:43:24.160 --> 0:43:25.920
<v Speaker 3>What it's sort of, I don't get Logan Web or

0:43:25.960 --> 0:43:28.480
<v Speaker 3>Mason Miller are getting traded this deadline. I'd be shocked

0:43:28.520 --> 0:43:30.239
<v Speaker 3>if either of them they ended up getting moved.

0:43:30.760 --> 0:43:33.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think what you got to San Francisco. I

0:43:33.239 --> 0:43:35.799
<v Speaker 1>really think Robbie Rai is the most most realistic one

0:43:35.800 --> 0:43:36.840
<v Speaker 1>they would move on from.

0:43:38.719 --> 0:43:42.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I honestly agree with that. So next couple questions

0:43:43.040 --> 0:43:44.760
<v Speaker 2>I will be taking and then a little bit faster

0:43:44.880 --> 0:43:48.279
<v Speaker 2>for both of them. Rich Bensinger, how can we get

0:43:48.360 --> 0:43:52.640
<v Speaker 2>rid of Sir Anthony Demingez? I you really can't. Unfortunately,

0:43:53.080 --> 0:43:55.719
<v Speaker 2>I think they've kind of nerved him as much as possible.

0:43:55.840 --> 0:43:59.719
<v Speaker 2>To be honest with you, he came in a twelve

0:43:59.719 --> 0:44:03.040
<v Speaker 2>to three ball game today and did fine, So you've

0:44:03.080 --> 0:44:05.120
<v Speaker 2>got to build his confidence back up right at a

0:44:05.120 --> 0:44:08.680
<v Speaker 2>certain point. He needs to get better and you kind

0:44:08.680 --> 0:44:10.839
<v Speaker 2>of need him otherwise now you need an extra ble

0:44:10.840 --> 0:44:12.480
<v Speaker 2>pen arm. So I don't know, it's it's a weird

0:44:12.520 --> 0:44:19.560
<v Speaker 2>situation and a not an easy one either, But the

0:44:19.640 --> 0:44:22.360
<v Speaker 2>short answer is you gotta just kind of do what

0:44:22.400 --> 0:44:24.520
<v Speaker 2>they've been doing and kind of nerve him as much

0:44:24.560 --> 0:44:30.719
<v Speaker 2>as possible. So next one White Sox three. Seeing as

0:44:30.760 --> 0:44:33.319
<v Speaker 2>our catcher position is an automatic out, no matter what,

0:44:33.400 --> 0:44:36.000
<v Speaker 2>would y'all rather see us get a good number three

0:44:36.040 --> 0:44:38.480
<v Speaker 2>pitcher and continue to suffer mediocre catching, or go get

0:44:38.480 --> 0:44:40.800
<v Speaker 2>an eight grade catcher and bring up Sandlin or Smith

0:44:40.880 --> 0:44:44.960
<v Speaker 2>to cover for Schultz after this weekend? To be honest

0:44:45.000 --> 0:44:48.720
<v Speaker 2>with you, I think you need two starters at this point.

0:44:48.800 --> 0:44:53.720
<v Speaker 2>I Fetti being four innings twice through the order max

0:44:54.520 --> 0:44:57.680
<v Speaker 2>plus Schultz not really showing you anything to that he

0:44:57.719 --> 0:45:00.600
<v Speaker 2>can get through six innings. You really need to starters.

0:45:01.080 --> 0:45:03.680
<v Speaker 2>I think started ask to be the priority, but I

0:45:03.719 --> 0:45:08.280
<v Speaker 2>don't think that allows you to skip out on getting

0:45:08.280 --> 0:45:10.160
<v Speaker 2>a catcher. But I don't think you got to break

0:45:10.160 --> 0:45:13.439
<v Speaker 2>the bank, especially because now Langoliers is hurt too. They're

0:45:13.440 --> 0:45:16.319
<v Speaker 2>not gonna move him. We talked ad nause and about

0:45:16.400 --> 0:45:18.680
<v Speaker 2>Rutchmand's not getting moved, so that leaves everyone bidding for

0:45:18.800 --> 0:45:21.839
<v Speaker 2>hunder Goodman, and I just don't think the Socks would

0:45:21.880 --> 0:45:27.480
<v Speaker 2>win that that that trade bidding. So all right, Michael,

0:45:27.560 --> 0:45:32.319
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna pass it to you. Just handle one, two

0:45:32.320 --> 0:45:35.880
<v Speaker 2>three from YouTube. What do you think the planet potentially

0:45:35.920 --> 0:45:38.200
<v Speaker 2>bring up some arms from Triple A down the stretch,

0:45:38.440 --> 0:45:41.040
<v Speaker 2>I assume mostly in a reliever role. And do you

0:45:41.080 --> 0:45:43.560
<v Speaker 2>think there's any potential to leverage some of their veteran

0:45:43.680 --> 0:45:45.480
<v Speaker 2>arms as trade chips?

0:45:46.840 --> 0:45:49.680
<v Speaker 3>Uh? So I'm gonna i'll tackle that second question.

0:45:49.880 --> 0:45:50.320
<v Speaker 1>First.

0:45:51.040 --> 0:45:54.400
<v Speaker 3>You mentioned Chris Murphy and Trevor Richards there.

0:45:54.120 --> 0:45:56.040
<v Speaker 1>Like maybe they could.

0:45:56.120 --> 0:46:00.440
<v Speaker 3>I think they'd have to have some some trade for

0:46:00.719 --> 0:46:05.160
<v Speaker 3>to acquire relievers in line before they commit to trading

0:46:05.160 --> 0:46:06.200
<v Speaker 3>one of those guys.

0:46:05.880 --> 0:46:08.080
<v Speaker 1>Just because you don't want to deplete your bullpen too much.

0:46:08.160 --> 0:46:11.320
<v Speaker 3>Like it's possible depending on if, like if that's the

0:46:11.360 --> 0:46:14.480
<v Speaker 3>way you can get the starting pitching help you need.

0:46:14.840 --> 0:46:19.239
<v Speaker 3>Maybe I'd say, like if there's a reliever like on

0:46:19.280 --> 0:46:21.640
<v Speaker 3>the current mob roster who could get trade, I think

0:46:21.680 --> 0:46:24.160
<v Speaker 3>like the most likely one would be like Tyler Schweitzer,

0:46:24.200 --> 0:46:27.879
<v Speaker 3>who's still the closer to that prospect status and you're

0:46:28.040 --> 0:46:29.600
<v Speaker 3>probably not going to be on the roster in a

0:46:29.600 --> 0:46:31.840
<v Speaker 3>playoff push, but maybe has a little bit of upside,

0:46:31.880 --> 0:46:34.600
<v Speaker 3>So like i'd say there's a less likelihood of that happening.

0:46:35.680 --> 0:46:37.719
<v Speaker 3>But in terms of the Triple A arms, yeah, I

0:46:37.760 --> 0:46:41.120
<v Speaker 3>think that I think the plan is that they're going

0:46:41.200 --> 0:46:44.120
<v Speaker 3>to call up both Tanner McDougall and Hagen Smith to

0:46:44.239 --> 0:46:48.600
<v Speaker 3>join the bullpen like soon, like within the next couple

0:46:48.640 --> 0:46:50.800
<v Speaker 3>of weeks, Like maybe they want to see what their

0:46:51.280 --> 0:46:53.920
<v Speaker 3>bullpen looks like after the trade deadline. But I think

0:46:54.040 --> 0:46:58.080
<v Speaker 3>that the plan for moving both of them to the

0:46:58.080 --> 0:47:03.239
<v Speaker 3>bullpen in Triple A now was like directly correlated with

0:47:03.280 --> 0:47:05.600
<v Speaker 3>their plan to get them in the Major League bullpen

0:47:05.800 --> 0:47:09.000
<v Speaker 3>like for this playoff push, so like that would I'd

0:47:09.000 --> 0:47:12.840
<v Speaker 3>be more surprised if they aren't up, honestly, Shane Smith,

0:47:12.880 --> 0:47:14.880
<v Speaker 3>I don't know, like they haven't really put him in

0:47:14.880 --> 0:47:17.840
<v Speaker 3>a bullpen roll and he's still kind of inconsistent in

0:47:17.880 --> 0:47:21.800
<v Speaker 3>triple A, Like it's hard to really trust him right now.

0:47:23.120 --> 0:47:24.720
<v Speaker 3>One more name I want to mention, and it would

0:47:24.719 --> 0:47:27.640
<v Speaker 3>actually be as a starter is Mason Adams has been

0:47:28.040 --> 0:47:31.000
<v Speaker 3>pretty good in his starts now that he's healthy and

0:47:31.080 --> 0:47:34.400
<v Speaker 3>back in the Charlotte Knights rotation. Like, if you can't

0:47:34.440 --> 0:47:37.960
<v Speaker 3>get two starting pitchers of this deadline, don't be surprised

0:47:37.960 --> 0:47:40.920
<v Speaker 3>to see him make some starts this year. I mean

0:47:41.120 --> 0:47:43.160
<v Speaker 3>I would probably replace him with No Schultz in the

0:47:43.239 --> 0:47:45.839
<v Speaker 3>rotation right now, for being completely honest, Like, just see

0:47:45.840 --> 0:47:48.920
<v Speaker 3>what he's got in the m'll be uh in MLB

0:47:49.000 --> 0:47:52.160
<v Speaker 3>setting right now. But yeah, that's just one more name

0:47:52.200 --> 0:47:52.959
<v Speaker 3>to keep an.

0:47:52.840 --> 0:48:00.120
<v Speaker 1>Eye on there. I'm sorry, I'm I'm just watching like

0:48:00.120 --> 0:48:01.920
<v Speaker 1>a civil war go on between our chat and I

0:48:01.960 --> 0:48:05.360
<v Speaker 1>think it's pretty great. Uncle Ted and White sox SO

0:48:05.480 --> 0:48:07.840
<v Speaker 1>three are really going at it. I appreciate you boys,

0:48:07.960 --> 0:48:10.520
<v Speaker 1>Just just so you guys all know anyone watching this

0:48:10.600 --> 0:48:12.279
<v Speaker 1>I'm watching the chat and I'm getting the real kick.

0:48:12.960 --> 0:48:14.480
<v Speaker 1>You're talking some good stuff out here.

0:48:14.880 --> 0:48:16.360
<v Speaker 2>I know there are some good questions in there. I

0:48:16.400 --> 0:48:18.480
<v Speaker 2>want to make sure we find time for once we

0:48:18.560 --> 0:48:22.120
<v Speaker 2>get through some of these earlier ones too.

0:48:22.320 --> 0:48:26.239
<v Speaker 1>So I think, for the record, right before we get

0:48:26.239 --> 0:48:28.480
<v Speaker 1>to another one, just because you kind of flew through it,

0:48:29.840 --> 0:48:31.799
<v Speaker 1>how many relievers do we have that are just so

0:48:31.920 --> 0:48:34.640
<v Speaker 1>much worse? And Sir Anthony Domingus when it comes to

0:48:35.440 --> 0:48:40.520
<v Speaker 1>expectations versus reality, Yes, nobody's nobody's failed worse since Sir

0:48:40.560 --> 0:48:43.160
<v Speaker 1>Anthony Domingus out of our bullpen. But we could do

0:48:43.560 --> 0:48:45.879
<v Speaker 1>so much worse, and based on how much we're paying him,

0:48:45.880 --> 0:48:47.960
<v Speaker 1>like there's absolutely no chance he's going anywhere.

0:48:48.480 --> 0:48:50.799
<v Speaker 2>I do agree with that. I do agree you could

0:48:50.840 --> 0:48:52.960
<v Speaker 2>do much this This is this was who he is

0:48:53.120 --> 0:48:56.520
<v Speaker 2>right like this. Yes the results are a little bit worse,

0:48:56.560 --> 0:48:59.319
<v Speaker 2>but high strike out rate, high walk rate, like this

0:48:59.440 --> 0:49:02.359
<v Speaker 2>is look look at the numbers from years past. This

0:49:02.400 --> 0:49:03.000
<v Speaker 2>is who he is.

0:49:04.040 --> 0:49:06.680
<v Speaker 1>And he absolutely shoves in the playoffs when he's when

0:49:06.719 --> 0:49:08.760
<v Speaker 1>he's asked to go on abound. He has a career,

0:49:09.760 --> 0:49:14.560
<v Speaker 1>great career playoff record, So all right, not to defend him,

0:49:14.800 --> 0:49:17.360
<v Speaker 1>he has been awful, but I.

0:49:17.960 --> 0:49:22.880
<v Speaker 2>Do get it though. But next question from at Jacob

0:49:22.960 --> 0:49:28.200
<v Speaker 2>underscore Shiner on Twitter x whatever. The Socks have been

0:49:28.200 --> 0:49:30.319
<v Speaker 2>linked to Clay Holmes, who has a two thirty five

0:49:30.360 --> 0:49:33.160
<v Speaker 2>ERA but mid to high threes in his peripherals. Nick,

0:49:33.239 --> 0:49:35.360
<v Speaker 2>I do love this question. It is going to you.

0:49:36.000 --> 0:49:39.080
<v Speaker 2>Do you guys with bad peripherals more often get priced

0:49:39.120 --> 0:49:42.120
<v Speaker 2>per their results or their future expectations?

0:49:43.480 --> 0:49:46.160
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, this is a great question. Uh. Kind of two

0:49:46.160 --> 0:49:49.200
<v Speaker 4>things here. The first one is Clay Holmes in general. Yeah,

0:49:49.280 --> 0:49:52.120
<v Speaker 4>I agree with the maybe the implication here if the

0:49:52.120 --> 0:49:54.160
<v Speaker 4>White Soxes do end up trading for Clay Holmes. As

0:49:54.160 --> 0:49:56.239
<v Speaker 4>a fan, I would not think of it as oh

0:49:56.239 --> 0:49:58.080
<v Speaker 4>my god, we just got our ace, our game one

0:49:58.120 --> 0:50:00.680
<v Speaker 4>starter at blah blah blah, give it more as we

0:50:00.760 --> 0:50:03.480
<v Speaker 4>just got like a solid number three. Who can you

0:50:03.640 --> 0:50:05.600
<v Speaker 4>you're comfortable giving the ball to in the playoffs? But

0:50:05.640 --> 0:50:08.200
<v Speaker 4>he's not the guy, you know what I mean. So,

0:50:08.239 --> 0:50:10.440
<v Speaker 4>in terms of the question, do guys with bad peripherals

0:50:10.719 --> 0:50:13.200
<v Speaker 4>more often get priced based on the results of the future?

0:50:13.640 --> 0:50:16.239
<v Speaker 4>I do think, and I'd welcome obviously anyone else's thoughts

0:50:16.280 --> 0:50:18.239
<v Speaker 4>on this, but I do think the MLB teams are

0:50:18.680 --> 0:50:21.359
<v Speaker 4>a lot more worried about protecting the future when they

0:50:21.360 --> 0:50:24.000
<v Speaker 4>make these deals rather than just trading for a guy

0:50:24.000 --> 0:50:26.399
<v Speaker 4>based on those era. I think Duke brought up Robbie

0:50:26.440 --> 0:50:28.200
<v Speaker 4>Ray at one point. Robby Ray has a great ra

0:50:28.360 --> 0:50:30.160
<v Speaker 4>right now, it's like three point one five or whatever,

0:50:30.400 --> 0:50:33.440
<v Speaker 4>but pretty much everything else looks bad. And I'm not

0:50:33.440 --> 0:50:35.600
<v Speaker 4>saying I don't want him, like I actually kind of do.

0:50:35.719 --> 0:50:37.279
<v Speaker 4>I think he'd be a good fit. He has you know,

0:50:37.440 --> 0:50:40.920
<v Speaker 4>a lot of experiences, et cetera. But I wouldn't be

0:50:40.920 --> 0:50:42.960
<v Speaker 4>paying you know, top dollar for him either, because the

0:50:42.960 --> 0:50:45.640
<v Speaker 4>peripherals are bad. So, at least my read on it,

0:50:45.680 --> 0:50:47.799
<v Speaker 4>I don't have a great trade to point to as

0:50:47.840 --> 0:50:50.839
<v Speaker 4>an example, but I think that teams tend to care

0:50:50.880 --> 0:50:53.600
<v Speaker 4>more about the under the hood stuff, whether it's peripherals

0:50:53.640 --> 0:50:56.399
<v Speaker 4>or whether it's even getting even a layer deeper than that,

0:50:56.480 --> 0:50:59.759
<v Speaker 4>like the information that's not even publicly available to fans,

0:50:59.760 --> 0:51:01.239
<v Speaker 4>like the deeper version of what you would get from

0:51:01.239 --> 0:51:02.960
<v Speaker 4>stat cast. I think that goes into it a lot,

0:51:03.120 --> 0:51:05.839
<v Speaker 4>basically thinking about it in terms of not what does

0:51:05.880 --> 0:51:08.040
<v Speaker 4>this guy, what has he done in the past, But

0:51:08.360 --> 0:51:09.960
<v Speaker 4>if we can tweak him in this way, or we

0:51:09.960 --> 0:51:11.440
<v Speaker 4>can make an adjustment with him, what do we think

0:51:11.480 --> 0:51:13.400
<v Speaker 4>he'll do for us in the future. So in somebody

0:51:13.680 --> 0:51:16.200
<v Speaker 4>in the case with somebody like Clay Holmes, you're hoping

0:51:16.239 --> 0:51:18.760
<v Speaker 4>that he I mean, you're you're hoping he can continue

0:51:18.800 --> 0:51:20.680
<v Speaker 4>being a two point three to five ye right pitcher

0:51:20.680 --> 0:51:23.640
<v Speaker 4>whiche and is unlikely, but more realistically, you're hoping he

0:51:23.680 --> 0:51:26.160
<v Speaker 4>can just give you six innings and you know, get

0:51:26.239 --> 0:51:28.360
<v Speaker 4>quality starts like six inning and three run and you

0:51:28.360 --> 0:51:30.520
<v Speaker 4>know the occasional one or two is what you're hoping

0:51:30.520 --> 0:51:33.360
<v Speaker 4>for from him. Because his problem is he has he

0:51:33.440 --> 0:51:35.719
<v Speaker 4>relies a lot on his sinker, but he doesn't really

0:51:35.719 --> 0:51:37.440
<v Speaker 4>miss bats, which is fine if you're getting a lot

0:51:37.440 --> 0:51:40.399
<v Speaker 4>of ground balls. But his problem is he gives up

0:51:41.120 --> 0:51:43.279
<v Speaker 4>a little more, sorry, a few more flyballs and he

0:51:43.280 --> 0:51:45.400
<v Speaker 4>would think for a primary sinker guy at least this

0:51:45.440 --> 0:51:48.080
<v Speaker 4>season so far, and he gets hit pretty hard, which

0:51:48.080 --> 0:51:49.799
<v Speaker 4>if it's on the ground it doesn't matter too much.

0:51:49.880 --> 0:51:52.560
<v Speaker 4>But he's got to focus on, you know, just keeping

0:51:52.560 --> 0:51:54.640
<v Speaker 4>the contact on the ground, because that's always the problem

0:51:54.680 --> 0:51:57.560
<v Speaker 4>with sinker bawlers. You don't miss bats. As soon as

0:51:57.560 --> 0:51:59.759
<v Speaker 4>that ground ball right goes from fifty five percent to

0:51:59.840 --> 0:52:02.520
<v Speaker 4>like fifty or forty five. Even though it seems slight,

0:52:02.600 --> 0:52:05.160
<v Speaker 4>it ends up making a huge impact on the overall performance.

0:52:05.200 --> 0:52:07.560
<v Speaker 4>So I like him as a trade target. But I

0:52:07.560 --> 0:52:10.399
<v Speaker 4>would want the White Sox to be trading for the

0:52:10.800 --> 0:52:13.600
<v Speaker 4>you know, the underlying metrics, and not the era, because

0:52:13.600 --> 0:52:15.880
<v Speaker 4>that's where you end up losing a lot of deals.

0:52:17.120 --> 0:52:19.080
<v Speaker 2>I agree with that, and I would be comfort I

0:52:19.120 --> 0:52:21.319
<v Speaker 2>would like to see them. I think the Mets are

0:52:21.360 --> 0:52:25.120
<v Speaker 2>a great trade partner for them if they really wanted

0:52:25.160 --> 0:52:27.239
<v Speaker 2>to get a controllable catcher that isn't the top of

0:52:27.239 --> 0:52:30.200
<v Speaker 2>the market. Francisco Alvarez would be interesting to me, butcher

0:52:30.280 --> 0:52:33.200
<v Speaker 2>behind the plate, But so's everybody the Socks have had

0:52:33.239 --> 0:52:35.680
<v Speaker 2>so far, so at a certain point, get a bat,

0:52:35.800 --> 0:52:38.680
<v Speaker 2>right like that? That's the one thing when it comes

0:52:38.800 --> 0:52:41.440
<v Speaker 2>to and I know it's not the question, but to

0:52:41.800 --> 0:52:43.399
<v Speaker 2>kind of take a little bit of a tangent. That's

0:52:43.440 --> 0:52:46.120
<v Speaker 2>the thing where I talk about, like, you know, we've

0:52:46.200 --> 0:52:49.520
<v Speaker 2>survived without the catching piece. It's like, yes, so if

0:52:49.520 --> 0:52:51.640
<v Speaker 2>you can add a bat, why don't you Because the

0:52:51.719 --> 0:52:56.080
<v Speaker 2>defense has been pretty bad regardless, so why not just

0:52:56.120 --> 0:52:58.960
<v Speaker 2>make put a bat there? But Holmes I like a

0:52:58.960 --> 0:53:02.520
<v Speaker 2>lot I thing if you added two Holmes type pitchers

0:53:02.640 --> 0:53:07.120
<v Speaker 2>that would be fine for me. My problem is, yes,

0:53:07.200 --> 0:53:09.719
<v Speaker 2>he's not exactly your guaranteed six inning guy, right, And

0:53:09.760 --> 0:53:12.600
<v Speaker 2>I think that was my biggest concern so far. But

0:53:12.680 --> 0:53:15.759
<v Speaker 2>I think in terms of the question around peripherals and

0:53:15.800 --> 0:53:18.520
<v Speaker 2>how it is, it's like a negotiation, right, Like I'm

0:53:18.520 --> 0:53:20.480
<v Speaker 2>going to go in and I'm going to say, I've

0:53:20.480 --> 0:53:22.959
<v Speaker 2>got this guy with a two thirty five ERA, which

0:53:23.040 --> 0:53:26.960
<v Speaker 2>is top whatever in the league, right, and a smart

0:53:27.000 --> 0:53:30.800
<v Speaker 2>team is gonna be like, nah, well they're what's really

0:53:30.800 --> 0:53:32.520
<v Speaker 2>going on under the hood there, Like what are some

0:53:32.520 --> 0:53:34.319
<v Speaker 2>of the numbers behind it? All of these teams have it.

0:53:34.360 --> 0:53:38.960
<v Speaker 2>I think it's negotiation points, And Duke Michael, I welcome

0:53:39.000 --> 0:53:40.839
<v Speaker 2>your thoughts as well. I think it ends up that

0:53:41.480 --> 0:53:46.840
<v Speaker 2>the peripherals help realistic set the realistic piece of the

0:53:46.880 --> 0:53:52.960
<v Speaker 2>price and maybe bring it back to the reality of

0:53:53.000 --> 0:53:54.680
<v Speaker 2>it to where the results are going to speak for

0:53:54.719 --> 0:53:58.520
<v Speaker 2>themselves obviously, but I do think the peripherals kind of

0:53:58.520 --> 0:54:03.239
<v Speaker 2>help right size any sort of value in a trade.

0:54:03.440 --> 0:54:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Well, I think, And actually I saw something in the

0:54:07.080 --> 0:54:11.200
<v Speaker 1>chat just asking about like underrated arms like Robbie Ray

0:54:11.200 --> 0:54:13.680
<v Speaker 1>and Clay Holmes are kind of like those are kind

0:54:13.680 --> 0:54:15.520
<v Speaker 1>of your answers, because those are kind of like the

0:54:16.480 --> 0:54:21.120
<v Speaker 1>not necessarily bargain bind trades. They would be the easier

0:54:21.160 --> 0:54:23.000
<v Speaker 1>trades to make than say, going and get a guy

0:54:23.040 --> 0:54:26.759
<v Speaker 1>like Detmur's or Schooble, which isn't fucking happening. I need

0:54:26.760 --> 0:54:28.960
<v Speaker 1>people to really just get off of that. It's not

0:54:29.080 --> 0:54:33.439
<v Speaker 1>gonna happen if we get Schooble, Like the next trade

0:54:33.480 --> 0:54:35.680
<v Speaker 1>would be us going and trading for Adley Rutchman. Like

0:54:35.800 --> 0:54:37.799
<v Speaker 1>that's that's how deep you have to think you were

0:54:37.880 --> 0:54:39.320
<v Speaker 1>about to go in if you're in trade for a

0:54:39.360 --> 0:54:44.279
<v Speaker 1>freaking Schooble on a rental. And but I really I

0:54:44.520 --> 0:54:46.600
<v Speaker 1>agree with the assessment that you kind of made on

0:54:46.600 --> 0:54:50.960
<v Speaker 1>that Nick with Yes, that era looks great. It's kind

0:54:50.960 --> 0:54:53.000
<v Speaker 1>of like when you see the batting average of a hitter, Wow,

0:54:53.040 --> 0:54:55.360
<v Speaker 1>that looks awesome, but then you just kind of ignore

0:54:55.520 --> 0:55:00.399
<v Speaker 1>everything else. That's that's why guys who you know, they'll

0:55:00.480 --> 0:55:03.439
<v Speaker 1>hit two sixty nine batting average and then they won't

0:55:03.440 --> 0:55:05.400
<v Speaker 1>be in the league the next year because other teams

0:55:05.400 --> 0:55:08.719
<v Speaker 1>are smartened up to that. But does that mean that

0:55:09.120 --> 0:55:12.400
<v Speaker 1>a Clay Holmes or a Robbie Ray wouldn't be a

0:55:12.440 --> 0:55:15.880
<v Speaker 1>net positive or net win for this trade deadline. Absolutely

0:55:15.880 --> 0:55:18.000
<v Speaker 1>not I would take either of them, and I think

0:55:18.120 --> 0:55:21.759
<v Speaker 1>uh Luis Castillo another one. There's definitely there's definitely those

0:55:21.880 --> 0:55:23.880
<v Speaker 1>arms out there. Every team kind of has some of

0:55:23.880 --> 0:55:26.879
<v Speaker 1>those guys. But that's why you're gonna see That's why

0:55:26.920 --> 0:55:29.560
<v Speaker 1>you're gonna see some of these guys get traded for

0:55:29.920 --> 0:55:33.200
<v Speaker 1>underwhelming returns even though they have a low ERA. It's

0:55:33.280 --> 0:55:37.239
<v Speaker 1>kind of similar to when we traded Adrian Houser last year.

0:55:37.600 --> 0:55:40.840
<v Speaker 1>You know, that's really the best ession.

0:55:41.760 --> 0:55:45.520
<v Speaker 2>That's a good comp of like what value might look

0:55:45.600 --> 0:55:47.799
<v Speaker 2>like for guys with decent numbers, but like what's really

0:55:47.800 --> 0:55:50.040
<v Speaker 2>going on under the hood. The Eric Fetti one is

0:55:50.080 --> 0:55:52.520
<v Speaker 2>another one where we not we all. I hated that

0:55:52.560 --> 0:55:54.279
<v Speaker 2>trade at the time, and I have to eat a

0:55:54.280 --> 0:55:58.080
<v Speaker 2>lot of crap for that because I hated that trade.

0:55:58.520 --> 0:56:00.800
<v Speaker 2>But that's that's an interesting kind comp as well of

0:56:00.840 --> 0:56:06.160
<v Speaker 2>another guy who clearly under the hood. Anybody who has

0:56:06.400 --> 0:56:10.399
<v Speaker 2>opened Baseball Reference in their lifetime or fan Graphs saw

0:56:10.440 --> 0:56:14.440
<v Speaker 2>the issues with Fetti and that kind of those two

0:56:14.520 --> 0:56:16.239
<v Speaker 2>deals I think are good ones to be like, Hey,

0:56:16.239 --> 0:56:19.120
<v Speaker 2>how how does e er versus your peripheral? How do

0:56:19.200 --> 0:56:24.440
<v Speaker 2>results versus peripherals? Kind of balance out there always an

0:56:24.480 --> 0:56:25.520
<v Speaker 2>interesting part of it.

0:56:25.600 --> 0:56:29.480
<v Speaker 3>So quick note, my cardio has never been better with

0:56:29.520 --> 0:56:31.720
<v Speaker 3>all the victory laps. I've been running around being happy

0:56:31.719 --> 0:56:36.000
<v Speaker 3>about that. In miguelve Artist trade, no one likes a gloater.

0:56:36.400 --> 0:56:39.479
<v Speaker 3>You know, it's good to be humble, Mike, that one

0:56:39.640 --> 0:56:42.520
<v Speaker 3>was so hated on though that, like I have to

0:56:42.719 --> 0:56:46.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm sorry, but like the people that were talking about, oh,

0:56:46.200 --> 0:56:48.719
<v Speaker 3>they should have gotten Connor Norby instead, like it.

0:56:48.960 --> 0:56:50.319
<v Speaker 1>Still insultome drives me.

0:56:52.560 --> 0:56:53.920
<v Speaker 2>I had a bad couple of weeks.

0:56:54.000 --> 0:56:55.960
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to keep running those victory laps on that

0:56:56.000 --> 0:56:57.479
<v Speaker 3>one I had.

0:56:57.520 --> 0:57:00.960
<v Speaker 2>I had a bad couple of weeks. Take it a

0:57:01.080 --> 0:57:04.680
<v Speaker 2>quick sid of My brother and I don't often agree

0:57:04.719 --> 0:57:06.400
<v Speaker 2>on this team, but both of us have looked at

0:57:06.400 --> 0:57:10.440
<v Speaker 2>each other recently like we both were wrong about that trade.

0:57:11.320 --> 0:57:12.839
<v Speaker 2>And the last thing I'll say on the Holmes piece

0:57:12.880 --> 0:57:14.880
<v Speaker 2>are just guys in general, like the Rays, the Holmes,

0:57:15.040 --> 0:57:20.480
<v Speaker 2>maybe don't blow your socks off. It's another kind of

0:57:20.480 --> 0:57:23.600
<v Speaker 2>tangential story. My dad and I are both not super handymen,

0:57:23.760 --> 0:57:26.240
<v Speaker 2>but we do things around the house and we have

0:57:26.320 --> 0:57:29.360
<v Speaker 2>a saying it's better than it was before. So if

0:57:29.400 --> 0:57:32.600
<v Speaker 2>you can do that that's my bar for a lot

0:57:32.600 --> 0:57:37.640
<v Speaker 2>of this team, especially at the trade deadline when we

0:57:37.800 --> 0:57:39.280
<v Speaker 2>don't really know what you're gonna get.

0:57:40.040 --> 0:57:45.080
<v Speaker 1>So my victory lapse will be around probably next year

0:57:45.120 --> 0:57:48.320
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to Louisan Helicunya, because I was trying

0:57:48.400 --> 0:57:50.760
<v Speaker 1>really hard not to run them during this past month.

0:57:50.560 --> 0:57:50.720
<v Speaker 2>But.

0:57:52.680 --> 0:57:56.240
<v Speaker 1>Because Tristan Peters and Louis on Helicunya. I know Trisan

0:57:56.320 --> 0:57:59.240
<v Speaker 1>wasn't included in that trade, but looking a lot better

0:57:59.280 --> 0:58:01.080
<v Speaker 1>than what we would be getting out of Luise Robert

0:58:01.120 --> 0:58:01.480
<v Speaker 1>this year.

0:58:03.600 --> 0:58:08.080
<v Speaker 2>So, speaking of Luis on Halacunya, maybe I'll send this

0:58:08.120 --> 0:58:13.160
<v Speaker 2>one to you, Duke. This is from at Fuagman Fuagman

0:58:13.400 --> 0:58:17.000
<v Speaker 2>on X. You guys need easier Twitter handles for me please.

0:58:17.640 --> 0:58:19.520
<v Speaker 2>I get that a Kunia has some value in speed

0:58:19.560 --> 0:58:22.720
<v Speaker 2>and versatility, but I feel that Peter's inevitable regression leads

0:58:22.720 --> 0:58:25.440
<v Speaker 2>to a greater need for more outfielders. I would call

0:58:25.520 --> 0:58:29.600
<v Speaker 2>up both Hayes and Prayer for Kunia and perez Antanachi

0:58:29.680 --> 0:58:33.680
<v Speaker 2>can play backup infield. Do you see this as a possibility? Basically,

0:58:34.040 --> 0:58:37.400
<v Speaker 2>I think they sent down Junior pres after the game today,

0:58:37.400 --> 0:58:41.160
<v Speaker 2>I saw someone tweeted that it was on his transaction logs.

0:58:41.880 --> 0:58:45.240
<v Speaker 2>What do you do at this point duke your thoughts.

0:58:46.920 --> 0:58:50.400
<v Speaker 1>Well, it's a difficult crunch that we've kind of kind

0:58:50.440 --> 0:58:52.760
<v Speaker 1>of been dealing with for most of the year, and

0:58:52.840 --> 0:58:55.400
<v Speaker 1>I think Tristian Peters has covered up a lot of it.

0:58:57.040 --> 0:58:57.440
<v Speaker 2>Now.

0:58:58.560 --> 0:59:00.400
<v Speaker 1>I feel like it's a touchy subject to try to

0:59:00.440 --> 0:59:04.200
<v Speaker 1>talk about Tristan Peter's inevitable regression because we've kind of

0:59:04.200 --> 0:59:06.800
<v Speaker 1>everyone's kind of been riding the high of it. You know,

0:59:06.840 --> 0:59:09.600
<v Speaker 1>he's got the great story, the former Savannah Banana being

0:59:09.680 --> 0:59:12.800
<v Speaker 1>named the All Star, Like, there's there's a lot there

0:59:12.840 --> 0:59:16.880
<v Speaker 1>that would that's really endeared him to the fans. I

0:59:17.080 --> 0:59:19.200
<v Speaker 1>was I've really been battling in my head for the

0:59:19.320 --> 0:59:24.520
<v Speaker 1>probably the past month about do we do we move

0:59:24.560 --> 0:59:26.440
<v Speaker 1>on from Tristan Peters while his value is at the

0:59:26.440 --> 0:59:28.360
<v Speaker 1>absolute highest in one of these trades, to be able

0:59:28.360 --> 0:59:32.360
<v Speaker 1>to get a more needed piece to this offense. Because

0:59:32.400 --> 0:59:35.560
<v Speaker 1>while Tristan is a great player, great story, I do

0:59:35.640 --> 0:59:37.680
<v Speaker 1>not necessarily want him to get traded. But it's something

0:59:37.720 --> 0:59:39.960
<v Speaker 1>that's been kind of teetering around in my mind where

0:59:39.960 --> 0:59:43.960
<v Speaker 1>it's like, if he if he regresses to the norm

0:59:44.080 --> 0:59:47.640
<v Speaker 1>of what everyone thought a Tristan Peters was gonna be. Yeah,

0:59:47.680 --> 0:59:49.560
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna there's not gonna be a lot there for us.

0:59:49.600 --> 0:59:51.680
<v Speaker 1>You know, he's gonna be what the fourth outfielder at

0:59:51.680 --> 0:59:55.280
<v Speaker 1>a certain point that you know next year if everything

0:59:56.000 --> 0:59:57.600
<v Speaker 1>starts to kind of fall apart from him and then

0:59:57.920 --> 1:00:00.760
<v Speaker 1>him kind of struggling here outside of the All Star

1:00:00.800 --> 1:00:04.680
<v Speaker 1>break really hasn't helped anything either. So I think that's

1:00:04.720 --> 1:00:07.400
<v Speaker 1>more the thought process you need to kind of keep

1:00:07.400 --> 1:00:09.360
<v Speaker 1>in mind, because he would be a valuable piece, I

1:00:09.360 --> 1:00:11.320
<v Speaker 1>think at the deadline, and you know it would be

1:00:11.360 --> 1:00:13.800
<v Speaker 1>a shocker. Teams would be surprised that we did move

1:00:13.840 --> 1:00:15.720
<v Speaker 1>a Tristan Peters with the first part of the year

1:00:15.720 --> 1:00:17.520
<v Speaker 1>that he had. But you have to have a serious

1:00:17.520 --> 1:00:20.160
<v Speaker 1>discussion if you think he's going to be a long

1:00:20.320 --> 1:00:24.560
<v Speaker 1>the long term center fielder, and I don't I don't

1:00:24.600 --> 1:00:27.920
<v Speaker 1>know how to answer that. I really don't like. I don't.

1:00:30.080 --> 1:00:32.320
<v Speaker 1>If some of you have better answers to whether you

1:00:32.360 --> 1:00:34.520
<v Speaker 1>think Tristan Peters is a long term answer in center

1:00:34.520 --> 1:00:37.560
<v Speaker 1>field or not, by all means, bring it to me.

1:00:37.640 --> 1:00:42.400
<v Speaker 1>But until then, I would say likely we stick with

1:00:42.400 --> 1:00:44.920
<v Speaker 1>Tristan Peters in center obviously, and I don't think Acuni

1:00:45.040 --> 1:00:47.200
<v Speaker 1>is going anywhere just because of how well he's done

1:00:47.440 --> 1:00:50.000
<v Speaker 1>in the last in the last month or two, especially

1:00:50.000 --> 1:00:52.440
<v Speaker 1>with how bad he started, he's really starting to thrive

1:00:52.520 --> 1:00:55.240
<v Speaker 1>and what his role is. Got picked off on a

1:00:55.280 --> 1:00:57.080
<v Speaker 1>really bad play today, so of course I have to

1:00:57.320 --> 1:01:00.800
<v Speaker 1>bring that up. But overall, like he also made it

1:01:00.800 --> 1:01:03.680
<v Speaker 1>to first base on a play that a lot of

1:01:03.720 --> 1:01:05.360
<v Speaker 1>the lineup isn't going to make it to first base

1:01:05.400 --> 1:01:08.040
<v Speaker 1>on that just automatically. Like the second you see at

1:01:08.080 --> 1:01:10.600
<v Speaker 1>infielder stumble with the ball that Luis on Helacuna hit,

1:01:11.000 --> 1:01:12.720
<v Speaker 1>you already know he's getting into first base, And there

1:01:12.760 --> 1:01:14.520
<v Speaker 1>is a lot of value in that, especially in a

1:01:14.520 --> 1:01:17.320
<v Speaker 1>pinch hitter type of role, where somebody who is very

1:01:17.440 --> 1:01:20.640
<v Speaker 1>much a platoon type hitter is in a situation late

1:01:20.640 --> 1:01:22.280
<v Speaker 1>in the game and you can get something out of

1:01:22.400 --> 1:01:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Luisan Helacuna, which is something they've already started testing around with,

1:01:26.080 --> 1:01:31.640
<v Speaker 1>especially with Andrew Bennett. Tendy. It's a good question, it's

1:01:31.680 --> 1:01:34.520
<v Speaker 1>a really good question, and I'm interested to see kind

1:01:34.520 --> 1:01:36.560
<v Speaker 1>of how that shift happens with what we're going to

1:01:36.600 --> 1:01:38.520
<v Speaker 1>do in the outfield as well.

1:01:38.680 --> 1:01:40.680
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, there's a lot a lot of moving parts to

1:01:40.720 --> 1:01:43.400
<v Speaker 4>the question, and to your point, Duke. It's good because

1:01:43.400 --> 1:01:45.240
<v Speaker 4>there are so many different ways they can do it.

1:01:45.280 --> 1:01:47.640
<v Speaker 4>The Peter's question, I mean, yeah, I don't. I'm not

1:01:47.720 --> 1:01:49.800
<v Speaker 4>yet convinced he's the long term answer, but I kind

1:01:49.800 --> 1:01:51.520
<v Speaker 4>of want to let him show me that he Isn't

1:01:51.680 --> 1:01:53.800
<v Speaker 4>you know what I mean? That he's earned more. I mean,

1:01:53.800 --> 1:01:55.400
<v Speaker 4>if you're going to trade him, try to capitalize. That's

1:01:55.480 --> 1:01:57.320
<v Speaker 4>one thing. But I don't think you need to be

1:01:57.360 --> 1:01:59.080
<v Speaker 4>too worried about him falling off. I mean, he might

1:01:59.120 --> 1:02:01.320
<v Speaker 4>fall off this season, but you don't need to have

1:02:01.760 --> 1:02:04.480
<v Speaker 4>continuencies in place necessarily because there's so many different ways

1:02:04.520 --> 1:02:07.000
<v Speaker 4>this could go right. I mean, Acunya to your point,

1:02:07.080 --> 1:02:09.520
<v Speaker 4>I'm not just saying this to be nice to you.

1:02:09.520 --> 1:02:12.960
<v Speaker 4>Like Acunya has value. Like you said, he's a great runner,

1:02:12.960 --> 1:02:15.640
<v Speaker 4>he can play multiple positions. He's actually been hitting for

1:02:15.680 --> 1:02:17.760
<v Speaker 4>the last month and a half. Like there's value when

1:02:17.760 --> 1:02:19.880
<v Speaker 4>that player. You're not going to DFA that player because

1:02:20.280 --> 1:02:23.240
<v Speaker 4>one of Everson Perera Austin Hayes needs to spot what

1:02:23.320 --> 1:02:25.040
<v Speaker 4>you could do if you really want to get creative

1:02:25.040 --> 1:02:28.160
<v Speaker 4>and you love Peerra and Hayes is I'm not saying

1:02:28.160 --> 1:02:30.439
<v Speaker 4>I want them to do this, but they were both

1:02:30.520 --> 1:02:33.520
<v Speaker 4>kind of the lefty Masher prototype at least, I mean

1:02:33.560 --> 1:02:35.560
<v Speaker 4>Hayes maybe a little bit more, since he's not as

1:02:36.000 --> 1:02:39.040
<v Speaker 4>athletic or good defensively as Pereira. What you could do

1:02:39.120 --> 1:02:42.120
<v Speaker 4>is Randall Gritchik has not really been that great over

1:02:42.240 --> 1:02:44.000
<v Speaker 4>He has like a four forty oh ps, I want

1:02:44.040 --> 1:02:46.959
<v Speaker 4>to say, over the last month, and it's a small

1:02:47.000 --> 1:02:49.480
<v Speaker 4>sample because he's a short side platoon guy. But if

1:02:49.520 --> 1:02:52.440
<v Speaker 4>you really trust Hayes and Pereira, that could be the switch.

1:02:52.440 --> 1:02:54.680
<v Speaker 4>As Junior Perez has already gone or already been optioned,

1:02:54.960 --> 1:02:57.040
<v Speaker 4>so we don't know the corresponding movie yet, but you

1:02:57.080 --> 1:03:01.040
<v Speaker 4>could maybe trade Gritchik instead of trading, know, making a

1:03:01.080 --> 1:03:03.280
<v Speaker 4>more bold move like a Tristan Peters or an Akuna

1:03:03.360 --> 1:03:05.480
<v Speaker 4>or whatever. That's an option the White Sox have. I

1:03:05.480 --> 1:03:07.600
<v Speaker 4>don't think they're going to do it, but there are

1:03:07.600 --> 1:03:09.080
<v Speaker 4>a lot of different things they could do. I mean,

1:03:09.120 --> 1:03:12.400
<v Speaker 4>maybe Colson Montgomery if the back is bothering him or something.

1:03:12.400 --> 1:03:14.360
<v Speaker 4>You know, he's falling ball off his shin. If that

1:03:14.440 --> 1:03:16.640
<v Speaker 4>keeps happening, he doesn't eye ol stint. You don't have

1:03:16.720 --> 1:03:18.640
<v Speaker 4>to reinvent the wheel. You could just move my drafts

1:03:18.680 --> 1:03:21.240
<v Speaker 4>short temporarily and it's Nachia to a second and great,

1:03:21.320 --> 1:03:23.680
<v Speaker 4>now you have an open outfield spot for somebody like

1:03:23.720 --> 1:03:26.000
<v Speaker 4>Hayes or Perera to play in or Gritchick to play

1:03:26.040 --> 1:03:29.360
<v Speaker 4>in every day. So they have flexibility and there's really

1:03:29.400 --> 1:03:31.080
<v Speaker 4>not a wrong answer. It's just a matter of who

1:03:31.080 --> 1:03:33.080
<v Speaker 4>do they believe in more. I think when when you're

1:03:33.120 --> 1:03:36.640
<v Speaker 4>talking about a Hayes or a Carrera to some extent

1:03:36.680 --> 1:03:37.480
<v Speaker 4>in Acuna too.

1:03:38.240 --> 1:03:41.280
<v Speaker 2>Perera is such an interesting case too, because like he

1:03:41.400 --> 1:03:49.160
<v Speaker 2>really hasn't hit them well this year, Like I don't know,

1:03:49.600 --> 1:03:52.800
<v Speaker 2>I'm not breaking down the door to make room for him. Personally,

1:03:53.280 --> 1:03:55.640
<v Speaker 2>I think Hayes is a veteran you know what you're getting.

1:03:58.200 --> 1:03:58.840
<v Speaker 4>Is what it is.

1:03:59.680 --> 1:04:01.680
<v Speaker 2>But because it's kind of the same way with Richick, right,

1:04:01.720 --> 1:04:04.240
<v Speaker 2>like none of them have been like you can't move

1:04:04.280 --> 1:04:07.400
<v Speaker 2>this guy. I think this plays into I think playtime

1:04:07.520 --> 1:04:10.040
<v Speaker 2>at playtimes six one six four. I also asked this

1:04:10.200 --> 1:04:13.360
<v Speaker 2>on Twitter about Pereira and Hayes's trade value. These questions

1:04:13.360 --> 1:04:17.280
<v Speaker 2>were kind of related. I don't think they have trade value,

1:04:17.360 --> 1:04:19.600
<v Speaker 2>to be honest, but I also don't know how much

1:04:19.720 --> 1:04:21.600
<v Speaker 2>value they have to the white sex. So you have

1:04:21.640 --> 1:04:23.720
<v Speaker 2>like three or four guys that maybe do the same

1:04:23.800 --> 1:04:28.160
<v Speaker 2>thing earlier this season two we talked about with Acunya.

1:04:28.720 --> 1:04:30.479
<v Speaker 2>I was like, you know, you can dfam at this point,

1:04:30.480 --> 1:04:32.400
<v Speaker 2>this was back when he had like a four hundred ops, Like,

1:04:32.400 --> 1:04:35.480
<v Speaker 2>you can dfam and keep him in the organization because

1:04:35.560 --> 1:04:37.800
<v Speaker 2>it's too early for teams to want a speed guy.

1:04:38.360 --> 1:04:42.120
<v Speaker 2>Now that's not the case. So you're you're keeping Akunya

1:04:42.160 --> 1:04:44.080
<v Speaker 2>because he's number one, been better, but number two he

1:04:44.120 --> 1:04:47.280
<v Speaker 2>serves a legitimate purpose for you down that down the line.

1:04:47.960 --> 1:04:51.400
<v Speaker 2>So I don't know with it does really come down

1:04:51.400 --> 1:04:54.480
<v Speaker 2>to your point, Nick, with Pereira, Hayes and Richick, who

1:04:54.520 --> 1:04:57.120
<v Speaker 2>do you like the best. I think they'll probably air

1:04:57.280 --> 1:05:01.760
<v Speaker 2>towards Pereira being younger, but he's been hurt so much

1:05:01.800 --> 1:05:05.240
<v Speaker 2>and there's nothing. I know, he had a couple of

1:05:05.280 --> 1:05:08.439
<v Speaker 2>good games, but I'm not trying to find playing time

1:05:08.480 --> 1:05:12.320
<v Speaker 2>for him. I don't know. It's a difficult question.

1:05:12.920 --> 1:05:17.160
<v Speaker 1>I also think it can't be discounted that there is

1:05:17.760 --> 1:05:20.240
<v Speaker 1>a good chance the White Sox are trying to keep

1:05:20.240 --> 1:05:23.360
<v Speaker 1>Antonacci in left field long term, and they're trying to

1:05:23.400 --> 1:05:25.320
<v Speaker 1>kind of get him to learn that position and really

1:05:25.320 --> 1:05:30.520
<v Speaker 1>stick with it because he has he'll have the occasional

1:05:30.520 --> 1:05:32.880
<v Speaker 1>moment where like he misreads the ball. I saw a

1:05:32.920 --> 1:05:36.200
<v Speaker 1>lot of people giving him flack in Cleveland over over

1:05:36.320 --> 1:05:39.920
<v Speaker 1>that air when we barely had grass to play on.

1:05:40.680 --> 1:05:43.520
<v Speaker 1>I think this isn't a situation, This isn't Andrew Vaughn

1:05:43.560 --> 1:05:47.120
<v Speaker 1>in leftfield. Sam is far more capable of a fielder,

1:05:47.600 --> 1:05:51.880
<v Speaker 1>and potentially that could be his spot. Like I, we're

1:05:51.960 --> 1:05:53.880
<v Speaker 1>still we still have a while to go before we're

1:05:53.880 --> 1:05:56.439
<v Speaker 1>going to see some of these you know, thirty short

1:05:56.480 --> 1:05:59.280
<v Speaker 1>steps that we've brought, that we've drafted or brought in

1:05:59.640 --> 1:06:01.800
<v Speaker 1>that will end up getting moved to somewhere in the

1:06:01.840 --> 1:06:04.240
<v Speaker 1>outfield or unless we decide to make an outfield move

1:06:04.280 --> 1:06:08.480
<v Speaker 1>in the offseason. I don't see any reason why to

1:06:08.480 --> 1:06:10.919
<v Speaker 1>move Sam out of left field. Ain't like any point

1:06:10.920 --> 1:06:13.200
<v Speaker 1>in the upcoming future. And I wouldn't be thrised if

1:06:13.240 --> 1:06:15.360
<v Speaker 1>the Socks have already kind of started to be like, hey,

1:06:16.360 --> 1:06:17.919
<v Speaker 1>really learn left field.

1:06:18.800 --> 1:06:21.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, they don't really have much coming up the pipeline

1:06:21.280 --> 1:06:24.280
<v Speaker 3>in terms of outfielders, So I kind of agree with

1:06:24.320 --> 1:06:27.240
<v Speaker 3>you on that, Like, I think that they want him

1:06:27.280 --> 1:06:29.720
<v Speaker 3>penciled in at left field because like, you don't have

1:06:29.840 --> 1:06:34.040
<v Speaker 3>much else coming up anytime soon. That's also another reason

1:06:34.080 --> 1:06:36.680
<v Speaker 3>why I don't think they're gonna trade Perera those because

1:06:37.200 --> 1:06:40.600
<v Speaker 3>Gritchick and Hayes they're off the team next year regardless

1:06:40.600 --> 1:06:43.960
<v Speaker 3>where Pereerra still has some team control. So even if,

1:06:44.040 --> 1:06:46.320
<v Speaker 3>like maybe he's not the best contributor right now, I

1:06:46.320 --> 1:06:47.960
<v Speaker 3>think that is going to play a factor in it,

1:06:48.080 --> 1:06:51.560
<v Speaker 3>like filling out next year's step chart, like you at

1:06:51.600 --> 1:06:54.840
<v Speaker 3>least can have him in competing for a spot already

1:06:55.240 --> 1:06:56.360
<v Speaker 3>versus Hayes.

1:06:56.120 --> 1:06:58.280
<v Speaker 1>And Gritchi Kor are going to be on the open

1:06:58.280 --> 1:07:04.720
<v Speaker 1>market for the record, and I know he's played well. Sorry, Nick,

1:07:06.160 --> 1:07:08.680
<v Speaker 1>I forget grid Jack's on the roster for large portions

1:07:08.720 --> 1:07:10.840
<v Speaker 1>of the time. To be honest, I love it when

1:07:10.840 --> 1:07:12.560
<v Speaker 1>I love it when it reminds me because I'm like, man,

1:07:12.600 --> 1:07:13.720
<v Speaker 1>this guy killed Flapty.

1:07:14.040 --> 1:07:18.040
<v Speaker 4>But eh, yeah, when we don't when we don't face

1:07:18.040 --> 1:07:20.000
<v Speaker 4>the lefty starter for a while, I totally get what

1:07:20.040 --> 1:07:21.560
<v Speaker 4>you mean, like you kind of forget he's there. But

1:07:21.600 --> 1:07:23.720
<v Speaker 4>I think we're facing two out of four lefties and

1:07:23.800 --> 1:07:26.240
<v Speaker 4>against the Yankees, so we'll see some of him this week,

1:07:26.280 --> 1:07:29.160
<v Speaker 4>he would think. But yeah, on the the left field

1:07:29.160 --> 1:07:31.240
<v Speaker 4>point for Antonaci, I think is a good one. Totally

1:07:31.240 --> 1:07:33.920
<v Speaker 4>agree that he's more capable than vaugh and can learn

1:07:34.000 --> 1:07:36.600
<v Speaker 4>the position. And also what we haven't said but I

1:07:36.600 --> 1:07:39.040
<v Speaker 4>think deserves to be said, is Tase Midroff has been

1:07:39.080 --> 1:07:41.000
<v Speaker 4>so good at second that it's almost like, I don't

1:07:41.240 --> 1:07:43.440
<v Speaker 4>everyone's still always like, oh, what money were going to trade?

1:07:43.480 --> 1:07:45.320
<v Speaker 4>Mindrophe if so many infielders who got to trade and

1:07:45.320 --> 1:07:47.760
<v Speaker 4>trade and trade. He's the seventh best second basement in

1:07:47.800 --> 1:07:50.480
<v Speaker 4>baseball this year on Fangrafts four. Like he's he's a

1:07:50.560 --> 1:07:53.920
<v Speaker 4>legitimately good player. He has no real weaknesses than the

1:07:54.040 --> 1:07:55.840
<v Speaker 4>lack of power, and he still has enough power to

1:07:56.240 --> 1:07:59.640
<v Speaker 4>keep the outfield honest, unlike a Nick Madriugal. So I mean, yeah,

1:07:59.720 --> 1:08:02.040
<v Speaker 4>moving at Nachi back to second could make sense in

1:08:02.080 --> 1:08:03.880
<v Speaker 4>a world where mind draft isn't there where you make

1:08:03.920 --> 1:08:06.440
<v Speaker 4>him like utility player. But he's like at two and

1:08:06.480 --> 1:08:08.600
<v Speaker 4>a half wins above replacement this year and we still

1:08:08.640 --> 1:08:10.640
<v Speaker 4>have sixty games left in the season. That's a player

1:08:10.680 --> 1:08:13.800
<v Speaker 4>I want to build a round. I even sound thrown

1:08:13.840 --> 1:08:17.519
<v Speaker 4>in in some like Mason Miller discussions or like you know,

1:08:17.600 --> 1:08:19.760
<v Speaker 4>hypothetical trades, and it's like, we got six and a

1:08:19.800 --> 1:08:22.360
<v Speaker 4>half more years of my draft, Like that's that's valuable.

1:08:22.360 --> 1:08:24.320
<v Speaker 4>That's more valuable than a lot of people he's being

1:08:24.320 --> 1:08:26.280
<v Speaker 4>put in the trade talks with. So sorry to go

1:08:26.320 --> 1:08:29.400
<v Speaker 4>on a tangent, but yeah, I think I like Antonachi

1:08:29.400 --> 1:08:31.760
<v Speaker 4>in left field actually long term, I think the bat

1:08:31.760 --> 1:08:34.840
<v Speaker 4>plays there too. I wouldn't be surprised in Michael, maybe

1:08:34.880 --> 1:08:36.439
<v Speaker 4>you can if you have thoughts on this, feel free

1:08:36.479 --> 1:08:39.280
<v Speaker 4>to share. I wouldn't be surprised if Bonhamer doesn't stick

1:08:39.320 --> 1:08:41.640
<v Speaker 4>in the infield, just because I mean he averages like

1:08:41.640 --> 1:08:43.519
<v Speaker 4>an error every two and a half games or something

1:08:43.560 --> 1:08:46.439
<v Speaker 4>like that. But I don't know where he would go though,

1:08:46.439 --> 1:08:48.720
<v Speaker 4>because like center field would be tough.

1:08:48.720 --> 1:08:49.439
<v Speaker 2>Maybe a corner.

1:08:50.080 --> 1:08:52.840
<v Speaker 3>Well, I've thought about this a lot actually, and like, no,

1:08:52.920 --> 1:08:55.640
<v Speaker 3>he's not a short stop. I think like the White Sox, No,

1:08:55.760 --> 1:08:59.240
<v Speaker 3>he's not a short stop. I mean, the the obvious

1:09:00.080 --> 1:09:03.799
<v Speaker 3>move should be the third base, but like you probably

1:09:03.840 --> 1:09:07.080
<v Speaker 3>have one or one of Rock Schaallawski or Coulson probably

1:09:07.160 --> 1:09:09.799
<v Speaker 3>penciled into your long term third baseman and then moving

1:09:10.160 --> 1:09:14.080
<v Speaker 3>you know, Nicol Vargus over to first base with Marikami

1:09:14.160 --> 1:09:17.519
<v Speaker 3>dhing So, like, where does that leave Bonhamer? Which is

1:09:18.040 --> 1:09:21.080
<v Speaker 3>another reason why I'm not sold that he should be

1:09:21.120 --> 1:09:25.040
<v Speaker 3>untouchable because there's not a clear spot for him personally.

1:09:25.280 --> 1:09:28.599
<v Speaker 3>I think maybe right field could be a spot for him,

1:09:29.160 --> 1:09:33.599
<v Speaker 3>move move a Montgomery over to center field potentially, if

1:09:33.760 --> 1:09:35.719
<v Speaker 3>you know Tristian Peters doesn't stick there.

1:09:36.240 --> 1:09:37.880
<v Speaker 1>That's just I trust me.

1:09:37.960 --> 1:09:40.080
<v Speaker 3>I've been doing this brand exercise for a while trying

1:09:40.080 --> 1:09:41.880
<v Speaker 3>to figure out where some of these guys fit in,

1:09:42.560 --> 1:09:45.920
<v Speaker 3>and right field kind of is the one that I

1:09:46.000 --> 1:09:49.439
<v Speaker 3>keep going back to. But like, that's not just a

1:09:49.520 --> 1:09:51.240
<v Speaker 3>clear fit. He still us to learn how to play

1:09:51.240 --> 1:09:54.840
<v Speaker 3>the outfield, which granted, that's why you draft shortstops because

1:09:54.840 --> 1:09:57.840
<v Speaker 3>they can usually play anywhere in the field, which I've

1:09:57.960 --> 1:10:00.519
<v Speaker 3>had to reiterate to a lot of people, But like

1:10:00.560 --> 1:10:02.640
<v Speaker 3>there is still learning curve that goes with that. So

1:10:03.439 --> 1:10:06.439
<v Speaker 3>it's it's a good problem to have having all these

1:10:06.600 --> 1:10:09.760
<v Speaker 3>you know, puzzle pieces trying to figure out where they

1:10:09.840 --> 1:10:12.800
<v Speaker 3>fit in. But like Chase my draft taking that step

1:10:12.880 --> 1:10:17.520
<v Speaker 3>up this year does complicate Bottomer's future and even Billy Carlson's,

1:10:17.560 --> 1:10:21.000
<v Speaker 3>Like I don't know specifically where the white socks are

1:10:21.000 --> 1:10:23.360
<v Speaker 3>going to have them penciled in for the for the future.

1:10:24.280 --> 1:10:26.880
<v Speaker 1>You know, Michael, I do share your pain about shortstops.

1:10:26.920 --> 1:10:29.720
<v Speaker 1>And having you explain to people why teams always draft

1:10:29.760 --> 1:10:34.960
<v Speaker 1>shortstops drives me. It's like, have you ever played did you?

1:10:35.080 --> 1:10:37.519
<v Speaker 1>Did you play any form of baseball? You always put

1:10:37.560 --> 1:10:42.759
<v Speaker 1>the best field there at shortstop every single time without fail. Also,

1:10:43.040 --> 1:10:45.400
<v Speaker 1>and uh, last, I know you're gonna have another question here,

1:10:45.680 --> 1:10:48.839
<v Speaker 1>but Michael, do you remember who was on this podcast

1:10:48.920 --> 1:10:52.160
<v Speaker 1>who just really did not kind of thought Chase my

1:10:52.240 --> 1:10:54.080
<v Speaker 1>draft was just kind of a throw into that trade

1:10:54.120 --> 1:10:57.280
<v Speaker 1>did and really it wasn't wasn't too high on him

1:10:57.600 --> 1:10:59.719
<v Speaker 1>now to get a really really low ceiling.

1:11:01.320 --> 1:11:02.400
<v Speaker 2>Wait, did you say that?

1:11:02.880 --> 1:11:03.120
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?

1:11:03.479 --> 1:11:04.320
<v Speaker 1>You said that?

1:11:04.800 --> 1:11:10.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, me, yes, you It sounds like Michael said it

1:11:10.000 --> 1:11:14.679
<v Speaker 2>down I thought you were talking about Michael said to Live,

1:11:15.080 --> 1:11:15.880
<v Speaker 2>I remember.

1:11:17.439 --> 1:11:17.800
<v Speaker 1>About me.

1:11:18.840 --> 1:11:20.599
<v Speaker 2>I'll have to look back. I don't know. I probably

1:11:20.640 --> 1:11:24.080
<v Speaker 2>wasn't high on him. My agree, I probably liked him.

1:11:24.080 --> 1:11:26.840
<v Speaker 2>I don't know. I like guys that walk, and I

1:11:26.920 --> 1:11:27.360
<v Speaker 2>like guys that.

1:11:27.439 --> 1:11:32.320
<v Speaker 3>Walk ividly remember talking about how he's probably going to

1:11:32.360 --> 1:11:34.680
<v Speaker 3>be more of a depth player than a starter.

1:11:34.520 --> 1:11:36.920
<v Speaker 1>Or so I thought that was directed towards me. So

1:11:38.240 --> 1:11:41.880
<v Speaker 1>myself then I I misremember then maybe it was just

1:11:41.920 --> 1:11:43.360
<v Speaker 1>me and Nick that were high on in my draft.

1:11:43.439 --> 1:11:49.800
<v Speaker 2>But uh, yeah, or whatever, I'm out of, just so

1:11:49.920 --> 1:11:55.240
<v Speaker 2>fans know I'm out of like pre asked questions for

1:11:55.320 --> 1:11:57.080
<v Speaker 2>anyone who sent those in. So first of all, thank

1:11:57.120 --> 1:11:59.280
<v Speaker 2>you to everyone who did those. I have a few

1:11:59.320 --> 1:12:01.640
<v Speaker 2>other one if there are more in the chat, if

1:12:01.680 --> 1:12:06.840
<v Speaker 2>you guys want to add some, we'll answer those as

1:12:06.840 --> 1:12:08.599
<v Speaker 2>we come towards the end here. I do have one

1:12:08.680 --> 1:12:12.920
<v Speaker 2>more from one of our guys, but I will say

1:12:12.920 --> 1:12:14.680
<v Speaker 2>a couple things. Number one, if you have questions, throw

1:12:14.760 --> 1:12:16.680
<v Speaker 2>them in the chat now, we'll keep an eye on it.

1:12:17.240 --> 1:12:19.479
<v Speaker 2>Number two, we'll get to our question from Brett. But

1:12:19.560 --> 1:12:22.600
<v Speaker 2>number three, Michael, I meant to ask this earlier. Do

1:12:22.680 --> 1:12:24.680
<v Speaker 2>you feel like I might have missed this? Do you

1:12:24.720 --> 1:12:27.439
<v Speaker 2>feel like Braden Montgomery can play centerfield too? He's been

1:12:27.479 --> 1:12:29.519
<v Speaker 2>awesome and right I wouldn't necessarily want to move him.

1:12:29.520 --> 1:12:32.120
<v Speaker 2>But as you're thinking about the question of like trying

1:12:32.200 --> 1:12:34.360
<v Speaker 2>to like I brought up Joe at all. For example,

1:12:34.400 --> 1:12:37.800
<v Speaker 2>if he wanted to get a corner outfielder or an

1:12:37.800 --> 1:12:43.080
<v Speaker 2>outfielder that could hit left handed pitching, obviously a Dalle

1:12:43.120 --> 1:12:45.080
<v Speaker 2>can't play center. Can Montgomery play center? Do you think?

1:12:45.120 --> 1:12:47.880
<v Speaker 2>Or is it something where it's like I could is a.

1:12:47.880 --> 1:12:51.559
<v Speaker 3>Stretch of a his best fit is in right field.

1:12:51.880 --> 1:12:54.719
<v Speaker 3>They played him a good amount in center field, though,

1:12:54.760 --> 1:12:57.240
<v Speaker 3>like coming up through the miners, Like, I think that

1:12:57.360 --> 1:13:01.800
<v Speaker 3>they trust him enough that, like, if that's where things

1:13:01.840 --> 1:13:06.599
<v Speaker 3>had to play out, he could probably handle it. He's

1:13:06.600 --> 1:13:09.760
<v Speaker 3>still much more your prototypical right fielder though, so like,

1:13:10.000 --> 1:13:11.760
<v Speaker 3>if they can keep him in right field, I think

1:13:11.800 --> 1:13:17.479
<v Speaker 3>that's ideal, But you don't really have a center field

1:13:17.760 --> 1:13:21.479
<v Speaker 3>solution if Tristan Peters doesn't stick, Like Tristan Peters might

1:13:21.520 --> 1:13:23.880
<v Speaker 3>still stick, like I don't want to give up on him,

1:13:23.960 --> 1:13:27.480
<v Speaker 3>especially after the season he's having. I have some concerns

1:13:27.520 --> 1:13:29.599
<v Speaker 3>that I also share with the rest of you about

1:13:29.640 --> 1:13:33.599
<v Speaker 3>his long term outlook. But he might still be that answer.

1:13:34.680 --> 1:13:38.680
<v Speaker 3>But if he's not, I think that's probably where they

1:13:38.680 --> 1:13:42.599
<v Speaker 3>would go first is moving Montgomery to center seeing how

1:13:42.640 --> 1:13:44.640
<v Speaker 3>he plays there, because again, he got a lot of

1:13:44.720 --> 1:13:48.559
<v Speaker 3>runway there in especially double A and triple A. So

1:13:48.640 --> 1:13:50.640
<v Speaker 3>I could see that definitely being an option.

1:13:52.920 --> 1:13:54.600
<v Speaker 2>Makes sense. I was just curious. More so, it's like

1:13:55.040 --> 1:13:59.839
<v Speaker 2>I want to put together an article our question from Brett.

1:14:00.000 --> 1:14:02.360
<v Speaker 2>I will continue to go through these Marlins have lost

1:14:02.360 --> 1:14:04.400
<v Speaker 2>twelve in a row and have certainly changed their fate

1:14:04.479 --> 1:14:07.479
<v Speaker 2>and how they might approach the deadline anyone of interest there.

1:14:07.479 --> 1:14:09.360
<v Speaker 2>Do you think it might have changed their fate? Do

1:14:09.400 --> 1:14:12.600
<v Speaker 2>you think they'll still kind of sell off or do

1:14:12.640 --> 1:14:16.519
<v Speaker 2>you think, hey, it's they might just not do anything.

1:14:16.560 --> 1:14:19.840
<v Speaker 2>But basically Marlin's intrigue at all. It's a team we

1:14:19.880 --> 1:14:21.719
<v Speaker 2>haven't talked about at all. I don't think.

1:14:23.280 --> 1:14:27.280
<v Speaker 3>I mean there's if they were going to be reasonable

1:14:27.280 --> 1:14:29.479
<v Speaker 3>about their asking price with him, which they haven't been

1:14:29.520 --> 1:14:32.880
<v Speaker 3>in years past. I would love Sandy L. Contra in

1:14:32.920 --> 1:14:35.960
<v Speaker 3>this rotation. I think he fits really well. I think

1:14:36.000 --> 1:14:38.519
<v Speaker 3>he's again the thing that I keep going back to

1:14:38.720 --> 1:14:41.200
<v Speaker 3>is you need an upgrade over Kay and Fetti. I

1:14:41.240 --> 1:14:44.840
<v Speaker 3>think he absolutely clears that he's got another year under

1:14:44.880 --> 1:14:48.320
<v Speaker 3>contract after this year, and he's such a good innings

1:14:48.360 --> 1:14:52.000
<v Speaker 3>year that I think that would really benefit this pitching

1:14:52.040 --> 1:14:56.080
<v Speaker 3>staff as a whole, especially benefiting the bullpen. Like that's

1:14:56.160 --> 1:15:01.120
<v Speaker 3>a fit that I really like. But they've never been

1:15:01.240 --> 1:15:04.040
<v Speaker 3>reasonable about their asking price for him. They've always just

1:15:04.200 --> 1:15:07.240
<v Speaker 3>like asked for asked you to sell the farm for him,

1:15:07.280 --> 1:15:09.960
<v Speaker 3>and like he's he's not an ace, like he had

1:15:10.080 --> 1:15:15.040
<v Speaker 3>some ace level, you know, years back in the early

1:15:15.080 --> 1:15:19.720
<v Speaker 3>twenty twenties, but like, he hasn't been that recently, so

1:15:20.000 --> 1:15:23.840
<v Speaker 3>it depends on what they would actually want for him.

1:15:24.320 --> 1:15:26.439
<v Speaker 3>But if they're going to be reasonable, that's where I

1:15:26.439 --> 1:15:26.960
<v Speaker 3>would start.

1:15:29.000 --> 1:15:31.000
<v Speaker 2>That comes back to the question we talked about with

1:15:31.160 --> 1:15:34.200
<v Speaker 2>like peripherals versus reality.

1:15:35.160 --> 1:15:37.559
<v Speaker 4>It does. And the thing without contract too, is that

1:15:37.600 --> 1:15:40.280
<v Speaker 4>he even in a I mean a quote unquote down here,

1:15:40.280 --> 1:15:42.880
<v Speaker 4>he's still like a serviceable startup pitcher. He still leads

1:15:42.880 --> 1:15:45.000
<v Speaker 4>the league, gettings pitched, and for a White Sox team

1:15:45.040 --> 1:15:47.120
<v Speaker 4>that's constantly asking the bullpen to come out in the

1:15:47.120 --> 1:15:49.280
<v Speaker 4>fourth and fifth inning, that alone is he was just

1:15:49.280 --> 1:15:51.240
<v Speaker 4>for getting your reliever, even if you don't trust him

1:15:51.240 --> 1:15:54.120
<v Speaker 4>in the playoffs. Getting your believers fresh for the playoffs

1:15:54.160 --> 1:15:56.479
<v Speaker 4>so that they're not you know, walking into a playoff

1:15:56.520 --> 1:15:58.800
<v Speaker 4>series with their arms already falling off would have a

1:15:58.840 --> 1:16:01.120
<v Speaker 4>lot of value, I think. So I agree with Michael

1:16:01.160 --> 1:16:04.519
<v Speaker 4>that historically they've been very you know, a little pie

1:16:04.520 --> 1:16:06.479
<v Speaker 4>in the sky. Let's stay about the asking price. But

1:16:06.920 --> 1:16:08.920
<v Speaker 4>from a pure fit standpoint, I love the fit. I

1:16:08.960 --> 1:16:10.760
<v Speaker 4>just don't know, and to be honest, I wasn't thinking

1:16:10.760 --> 1:16:12.559
<v Speaker 4>they were going to sell. I know, like Brett said,

1:16:12.560 --> 1:16:14.920
<v Speaker 4>they're on this massive losing streak, which I didn't see coming,

1:16:15.040 --> 1:16:16.320
<v Speaker 4>so kind of unexpected.

1:16:16.360 --> 1:16:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Overall, I would say instead of Sandy L. Contra and

1:16:21.880 --> 1:16:24.639
<v Speaker 1>it's it sucks because he just got onto the IR

1:16:25.000 --> 1:16:27.599
<v Speaker 1>or the I L But I really like my Max

1:16:27.680 --> 1:16:30.519
<v Speaker 1>Mayor and the rotation. Big fan of what he's done

1:16:30.520 --> 1:16:33.639
<v Speaker 1>this year. I can be honest and saying that he's

1:16:33.640 --> 1:16:35.960
<v Speaker 1>helped me win parlays, so that plays a big role

1:16:35.960 --> 1:16:38.360
<v Speaker 1>in it as well. But as far as like pitching

1:16:38.400 --> 1:16:42.439
<v Speaker 1>strikeout overs, this guy just shoves very good picture. This

1:16:42.560 --> 1:16:44.680
<v Speaker 1>is his first year where he's really been competitive in

1:16:44.720 --> 1:16:50.040
<v Speaker 1>the rotation. It's complicated because he's in the IL situation,

1:16:50.160 --> 1:16:53.080
<v Speaker 1>but he's an even all star. Would really like that

1:16:53.160 --> 1:16:55.800
<v Speaker 1>as well. If Miami's willing to do a full send, so.

1:16:57.400 --> 1:17:00.120
<v Speaker 2>I would cost you a pretty funny that's like your star.

1:17:00.160 --> 1:17:03.920
<v Speaker 2>And with Schultz in that conversation, you're you're giving up

1:17:04.280 --> 1:17:06.920
<v Speaker 2>the six years of Schultz for the three years of

1:17:07.760 --> 1:17:11.160
<v Speaker 2>Meyer for example. That's that's exactly where you start getting

1:17:11.160 --> 1:17:12.960
<v Speaker 2>into those types of conversations as well.

1:17:13.000 --> 1:17:17.880
<v Speaker 1>But low key, I'm open to that. I'll be honest. Yeah,

1:17:19.000 --> 1:17:21.080
<v Speaker 1>as big of a Schultz guy as I am. If

1:17:21.400 --> 1:17:25.040
<v Speaker 1>if it's sagas Max Mayor, I'd find a way to

1:17:25.040 --> 1:17:25.680
<v Speaker 1>be fine with it.

1:17:26.600 --> 1:17:30.520
<v Speaker 3>I did mention Noah Schultz as a potential trade possibility

1:17:30.600 --> 1:17:34.080
<v Speaker 3>in my recent article. I specifically mentioned that like it

1:17:34.120 --> 1:17:39.479
<v Speaker 3>would there's next to no scenarios where that's possible, Max Mayor,

1:17:39.720 --> 1:17:43.160
<v Speaker 3>that one, yeah, I could, I could get behind that one.

1:17:43.160 --> 1:17:45.559
<v Speaker 3>That might be something that could even intrigue the.

1:17:45.520 --> 1:17:46.479
<v Speaker 1>White Sox a little bit.

1:17:47.000 --> 1:17:50.320
<v Speaker 3>It'll never happen, but like that's one of those few

1:17:50.320 --> 1:17:53.400
<v Speaker 3>scenarios where like, okay, like if like a team's asking

1:17:53.439 --> 1:17:55.479
<v Speaker 3>for Schultz for this player, you at least have to

1:17:55.520 --> 1:17:56.800
<v Speaker 3>have the conversation.

1:17:57.600 --> 1:17:59.519
<v Speaker 4>Right, Yeah, to me, it's even better. It would be

1:17:59.560 --> 1:18:01.960
<v Speaker 4>even better than like a Logan Web or any pretty

1:18:02.040 --> 1:18:04.400
<v Speaker 4>much any other starting pitcher. Then we've discussed other than Schoogle,

1:18:04.439 --> 1:18:07.880
<v Speaker 4>which isn't happening. So yeah, I agree with you guys there.

1:18:07.920 --> 1:18:10.439
<v Speaker 4>But while we've been talking, actually there was one rumor

1:18:10.439 --> 1:18:13.800
<v Speaker 4>that came up from Jim Bowden, who he has his

1:18:13.800 --> 1:18:15.360
<v Speaker 4>own podcast. Now I know he used to do with

1:18:15.400 --> 1:18:18.400
<v Speaker 4>The Athletic and a couple others, but on this podcast,

1:18:18.439 --> 1:18:22.080
<v Speaker 4>apparently he and his co host are reporting that the

1:18:22.120 --> 1:18:25.679
<v Speaker 4>Mets are shopping their catchers Francisco Alvaress whom we talked about,

1:18:25.880 --> 1:18:28.200
<v Speaker 4>not so Louis Torrens, and he said, watch out for

1:18:28.240 --> 1:18:31.599
<v Speaker 4>the White Sox on Torrens. I'm told they're engaged with them.

1:18:31.720 --> 1:18:33.800
<v Speaker 4>So how do you guys feel about that? Michael U

1:18:33.840 --> 1:18:34.639
<v Speaker 4>semed to have some thought.

1:18:35.439 --> 1:18:37.799
<v Speaker 3>I've been looking at him. Actually I like that a lot.

1:18:37.920 --> 1:18:41.760
<v Speaker 3>He's been a pretty solid catcher, and correct me if

1:18:41.800 --> 1:18:44.439
<v Speaker 3>I'm wrong, but I believe he's under contract for pretty

1:18:44.640 --> 1:18:48.800
<v Speaker 3>cheap for one more year after this year. Two. That's one,

1:18:48.880 --> 1:18:51.679
<v Speaker 3>Like he's been a rock solid catcher, like splaiting time

1:18:51.720 --> 1:18:55.519
<v Speaker 3>with Alvarez, much better behind the plate than Alvarez, and

1:18:55.560 --> 1:18:57.720
<v Speaker 3>he's not a world beater at the plate, but like

1:18:58.840 --> 1:19:01.679
<v Speaker 3>he's good enough. Like that, that's one that I would

1:19:01.800 --> 1:19:02.360
<v Speaker 3>really like.

1:19:03.560 --> 1:19:06.200
<v Speaker 2>That's that kind of helps me with the question. And

1:19:06.280 --> 1:19:07.680
<v Speaker 2>I've asked a couple of times, like what do the

1:19:07.720 --> 1:19:10.479
<v Speaker 2>Socks want out of a catcher? Do they want a

1:19:10.600 --> 1:19:14.439
<v Speaker 2>game manager, someone who elevates them defensively, which they've been

1:19:14.520 --> 1:19:17.320
<v Speaker 2>terrible at, or do they just want a bat and say, hey,

1:19:17.439 --> 1:19:19.520
<v Speaker 2>we're tired of having a black hole in this line?

1:19:19.560 --> 1:19:23.439
<v Speaker 2>Whoever was in White Sox three asked that question about like,

1:19:23.479 --> 1:19:25.320
<v Speaker 2>are we fine keeping a black hole. Let's at least

1:19:25.360 --> 1:19:31.240
<v Speaker 2>upgrade the defense. If that's true, that might trend towards

1:19:31.520 --> 1:19:34.519
<v Speaker 2>You're less about the Stevenson's of the world and the

1:19:34.600 --> 1:19:36.240
<v Speaker 2>Jonah Hims of the world, and you're looking at a

1:19:36.280 --> 1:19:40.360
<v Speaker 2>Torrents who's, yes, by all metrics, incredibly strong defensively, but

1:19:40.800 --> 1:19:43.760
<v Speaker 2>doesn't really swing at too well with the bat. All right,

1:19:43.840 --> 1:19:46.439
<v Speaker 2>let's just continue to get away with not having that.

1:19:46.200 --> 1:19:48.400
<v Speaker 2>That would be interesting to me. It would signal the

1:19:48.479 --> 1:19:50.240
<v Speaker 2>answer to that question. I keep asking, like, what do

1:19:50.240 --> 1:19:52.000
<v Speaker 2>you want? Do you want a defense guy or a

1:19:52.040 --> 1:19:54.599
<v Speaker 2>bat first guy. Yeah.

1:19:54.640 --> 1:19:57.040
<v Speaker 1>I can't speak for Chris Gotzer will benable on that,

1:19:57.080 --> 1:20:01.439
<v Speaker 1>but you can find a lot of defensive catchers out there.

1:20:01.840 --> 1:20:04.960
<v Speaker 1>We need, we need something offensively out of that position,

1:20:05.000 --> 1:20:06.439
<v Speaker 1>in my opinion at this point.

1:20:07.960 --> 1:20:10.960
<v Speaker 2>So we'll take a couple of questions from the chat

1:20:11.000 --> 1:20:13.720
<v Speaker 2>and then we'll round it on out here and du

1:20:13.840 --> 1:20:17.240
<v Speaker 2>can take us out. I saw one question about Chilowski

1:20:17.280 --> 1:20:21.160
<v Speaker 2>that I thought, Michael, you might be interested in any

1:20:21.240 --> 1:20:24.000
<v Speaker 2>chance he finds some time in Birmingham this year, what

1:20:24.040 --> 1:20:27.559
<v Speaker 2>do you think the plan is for him with the

1:20:27.680 --> 1:20:29.320
<v Speaker 2>idea of the hope that he comes up at some

1:20:29.320 --> 1:20:30.439
<v Speaker 2>point in twenty twenty seven.

1:20:33.360 --> 1:20:36.519
<v Speaker 3>I'm not going to rule out Birmingham this year. I

1:20:36.600 --> 1:20:40.439
<v Speaker 3>think it's I wouldn't expect it. I think more than

1:20:40.560 --> 1:20:46.560
<v Speaker 3>likely he starts at Birmingham next year. I think the

1:20:47.280 --> 1:20:50.680
<v Speaker 3>goal with getting him signed so quickly is that he

1:20:50.760 --> 1:20:53.479
<v Speaker 3>can get a couple tune up games in Arizona to

1:20:53.600 --> 1:20:56.919
<v Speaker 3>start before that season ends, because that season ends incredibly

1:20:57.000 --> 1:20:59.719
<v Speaker 3>quickly after the draft, which is one of the many

1:20:59.720 --> 1:21:03.160
<v Speaker 3>reasons why I hate the timing of the MLB draft.

1:21:03.320 --> 1:21:05.479
<v Speaker 3>But that's a whole other conversation we can get into.

1:21:06.560 --> 1:21:08.680
<v Speaker 3>But I think he's gonna spend a few games in Arizona,

1:21:09.800 --> 1:21:13.200
<v Speaker 3>probably go to Winston Salem, and I think probably stick

1:21:13.280 --> 1:21:16.880
<v Speaker 3>there if for no other reason than they're probably going

1:21:16.920 --> 1:21:19.120
<v Speaker 3>to be a playoff team and you can get some

1:21:19.160 --> 1:21:22.920
<v Speaker 3>extra games in a playoff setting for Hya Winston Salem,

1:21:22.960 --> 1:21:25.320
<v Speaker 3>so I could see them wanting to keep him there

1:21:25.400 --> 1:21:28.880
<v Speaker 3>just to get a little bit of extra time. Again,

1:21:28.920 --> 1:21:32.760
<v Speaker 3>I won't rule out double A. I'd be a little surprised.

1:21:32.800 --> 1:21:35.200
<v Speaker 3>I wouldn't be shocked, but I think more than likely

1:21:35.240 --> 1:21:38.479
<v Speaker 3>he's gonna end the year in HIE Winston Salem start

1:21:38.520 --> 1:21:40.160
<v Speaker 3>next year in Birmingham.

1:21:40.760 --> 1:21:43.080
<v Speaker 2>That was at Baseball Toss. By the way, I forgot

1:21:43.080 --> 1:21:47.600
<v Speaker 2>to add that I don't hate that idea of just

1:21:48.520 --> 1:21:51.400
<v Speaker 2>it's not even slow playing it either. Like slow playing

1:21:51.439 --> 1:21:56.599
<v Speaker 2>it is like, oh yeah, sitting high a I'd prefer

1:21:56.640 --> 1:22:00.240
<v Speaker 2>not to move it that fast, if it's my personal opinion.

1:22:00.280 --> 1:22:03.240
<v Speaker 2>But I know there's things they want to do mechanics wise.

1:22:03.640 --> 1:22:05.800
<v Speaker 2>I mean, they talked about I think we've talked about

1:22:05.800 --> 1:22:09.760
<v Speaker 2>it before on the show the extended lead arm. It's kind

1:22:09.760 --> 1:22:11.800
<v Speaker 2>of like that arm bar type thing, and they talked

1:22:11.800 --> 1:22:14.960
<v Speaker 2>about that. I think it was in the Jesse Rodgers

1:22:15.120 --> 1:22:16.840
<v Speaker 2>article where they were going back and forth like emer

1:22:16.880 --> 1:22:21.400
<v Speaker 2>sin Er Chalowski. I think stuff like that'll be easier

1:22:21.400 --> 1:22:23.240
<v Speaker 2>to fix when you don't have to worry about getting

1:22:23.280 --> 1:22:25.760
<v Speaker 2>ready for a game every day too, So that.

1:22:27.880 --> 1:22:30.160
<v Speaker 3>It really is like getting that inside look that was

1:22:30.439 --> 1:22:32.479
<v Speaker 3>such a good read. If you haven't read that yet,

1:22:32.560 --> 1:22:34.400
<v Speaker 3>I encourage you to go back and read that. That

1:22:34.520 --> 1:22:37.720
<v Speaker 3>was an awesome article Getting an inside look in the

1:22:37.720 --> 1:22:38.679
<v Speaker 3>White Sox war room.

1:22:41.560 --> 1:22:44.200
<v Speaker 2>One other question I'm seeing here. This comes from Unlock

1:22:44.439 --> 1:22:47.519
<v Speaker 2>three D three three. It's kind of something we had

1:22:47.520 --> 1:22:49.519
<v Speaker 2>talked about earlier. But I'm gonna you could have just

1:22:49.560 --> 1:22:59.880
<v Speaker 2>said unlocked, unlocked three, don't do things live everybody, Yeah,

1:23:00.120 --> 1:23:06.600
<v Speaker 2>unlocked thirty three. Geez god, sorry, I'm dumb. AnyWho. He

1:23:06.760 --> 1:23:09.639
<v Speaker 2>was talking about the fact that guests there's the rumor

1:23:09.640 --> 1:23:11.040
<v Speaker 2>that he might not trade any of the top ten

1:23:11.080 --> 1:23:14.720
<v Speaker 2>prospects whatever, and the idea of not giving up the

1:23:14.720 --> 1:23:19.560
<v Speaker 2>farm sure, but mentioned Billy Carlson specifically. I guess the

1:23:19.600 --> 1:23:22.639
<v Speaker 2>way I'm going to phrase this question is more about

1:23:22.720 --> 1:23:25.559
<v Speaker 2>Carlson and why it feels like everyone's willing to give

1:23:25.640 --> 1:23:29.800
<v Speaker 2>him up in potential trades, and Michael kind of lean

1:23:29.880 --> 1:23:31.200
<v Speaker 2>back to you on that. I guess, Duke and Nick

1:23:31.280 --> 1:23:33.400
<v Speaker 2>to you as well. Do you feel comfortable with the

1:23:33.439 --> 1:23:34.760
<v Speaker 2>idea of, like, yeah, if they were going to give

1:23:34.840 --> 1:23:37.400
<v Speaker 2>up a bigger name, Carlson is fine.

1:23:38.840 --> 1:23:39.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

1:23:39.200 --> 1:23:42.720
<v Speaker 3>I mean so, I was on this podcast before the

1:23:42.800 --> 1:23:47.040
<v Speaker 3>draft last year being a massive Billy Carlson guy, and

1:23:47.120 --> 1:23:50.400
<v Speaker 3>I was ecstatic when they did end up taking him

1:23:50.400 --> 1:23:54.320
<v Speaker 3>with the tenth pick last year. But it feels like

1:23:54.479 --> 1:23:58.280
<v Speaker 3>he's been destined to be a trade candidate since they

1:23:58.360 --> 1:24:00.679
<v Speaker 3>drafted him, just because we're the hell are you gonna

1:24:00.680 --> 1:24:04.280
<v Speaker 3>play him like it? I just don't see a spot

1:24:04.360 --> 1:24:07.760
<v Speaker 3>long term for him, and he has value, Like he

1:24:07.920 --> 1:24:11.160
<v Speaker 3>makes too much sense to be a big time trade

1:24:11.160 --> 1:24:14.640
<v Speaker 3>ship for this team as someone whose primary source of

1:24:14.720 --> 1:24:17.719
<v Speaker 3>value is his ability to play shortstop at a high level.

1:24:18.640 --> 1:24:21.080
<v Speaker 3>But Colson, I mean, I know it hasn't looked as

1:24:21.120 --> 1:24:23.559
<v Speaker 3>good recently, and I wonder if maybe there's something going

1:24:23.600 --> 1:24:25.360
<v Speaker 3>on with his back or I don't want to speculate,

1:24:25.400 --> 1:24:29.400
<v Speaker 3>but like, he hasn't looked as good defensively recently, but

1:24:29.479 --> 1:24:32.360
<v Speaker 3>like overall, he has been a good defensive shortstop. This year,

1:24:32.960 --> 1:24:36.520
<v Speaker 3>Rockchalowski was one of the best defensive shortstops in college baseball.

1:24:37.080 --> 1:24:39.800
<v Speaker 3>You still have Kleb Bondmoor, who is technically shortstop, even

1:24:39.840 --> 1:24:44.360
<v Speaker 3>though I don't think he's gonna end up their long term.

1:24:43.320 --> 1:24:47.559
<v Speaker 3>There's not really a spot for Carlson. And he could

1:24:47.600 --> 1:24:51.679
<v Speaker 3>play anywhere in the diamond. I fully believe he could

1:24:51.680 --> 1:24:55.880
<v Speaker 3>successfully move anywhere in the field and just right off

1:24:55.920 --> 1:24:59.679
<v Speaker 3>the bat be amazing at it. But that only brings

1:24:59.680 --> 1:25:03.120
<v Speaker 3>so much value, like when you have guys that are

1:25:03.160 --> 1:25:07.799
<v Speaker 3>pretty much penciled into every position, Like I don't think

1:25:08.800 --> 1:25:10.960
<v Speaker 3>it makes sense to hold on to him for too long.

1:25:12.600 --> 1:25:13.960
<v Speaker 4>I would.

1:25:14.439 --> 1:25:17.280
<v Speaker 3>I think he's probably better off. I don't even know

1:25:17.280 --> 1:25:19.120
<v Speaker 3>if he'll be at this deadline or over the off

1:25:19.120 --> 1:25:21.439
<v Speaker 3>season or maybe even next year, but at some point

1:25:21.520 --> 1:25:24.160
<v Speaker 3>I think there's gonna need to be a decision made

1:25:24.200 --> 1:25:26.920
<v Speaker 3>about who has to get moved, and he's the most

1:25:27.000 --> 1:25:28.120
<v Speaker 3>likely candidate to me.

1:25:29.880 --> 1:25:31.599
<v Speaker 1>You know, Michael, if I heard you for a company,

1:25:31.640 --> 1:25:33.320
<v Speaker 1>I would hire you as the guy to break bad

1:25:33.360 --> 1:25:37.880
<v Speaker 1>news to people because you started, you started so good

1:25:38.040 --> 1:25:40.840
<v Speaker 1>or you know, talking about how excited you were about him,

1:25:40.880 --> 1:25:44.760
<v Speaker 1>and then you're just yeah, but you know, it's it's

1:25:44.760 --> 1:25:48.200
<v Speaker 1>getting tough. I guess uh. And that's honestly, it was

1:25:48.200 --> 1:25:51.720
<v Speaker 1>a perfect breakdown of it. I think with really like

1:25:51.880 --> 1:25:53.840
<v Speaker 1>all these short steps we do have in the system

1:25:53.920 --> 1:25:57.280
<v Speaker 1>right now, it just keeps taking me back to, like,

1:25:57.439 --> 1:26:01.240
<v Speaker 1>what is our long term plan in center field? Who

1:26:01.280 --> 1:26:03.719
<v Speaker 1>can who can play there? Who do we have currently

1:26:03.760 --> 1:26:07.040
<v Speaker 1>in the prospect pool? Who is has the best shot

1:26:07.120 --> 1:26:11.439
<v Speaker 1>to be our long term center fielder? And if you're

1:26:11.560 --> 1:26:15.880
<v Speaker 1>willing to go out and sign a good you know,

1:26:16.000 --> 1:26:20.320
<v Speaker 1>good side, good side, good sized market center fielder this offseason,

1:26:20.360 --> 1:26:23.080
<v Speaker 1>which is hilarious because we're we're Chicago White Sox fans,

1:26:23.320 --> 1:26:26.280
<v Speaker 1>But is that the route you want to take? Do you?

1:26:27.360 --> 1:26:30.479
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. I'm just because if we have every

1:26:30.520 --> 1:26:32.439
<v Speaker 1>if we have every spot penciled in and we're dead

1:26:32.479 --> 1:26:35.799
<v Speaker 1>serious about opening the window, then they should all be available.

1:26:36.240 --> 1:26:38.040
<v Speaker 1>But if they have one of these guys kind of

1:26:38.040 --> 1:26:39.559
<v Speaker 1>penciled in where they're like, you know, I think this

1:26:39.600 --> 1:26:42.240
<v Speaker 1>guy could actually look really good in center, that'd be

1:26:42.280 --> 1:26:46.720
<v Speaker 1>the untouchable one. But outside of Chris Getz's office, it's

1:26:46.800 --> 1:26:48.599
<v Speaker 1>going to be hard to find that answer that question.

1:26:49.920 --> 1:26:50.120
<v Speaker 2>Right.

1:26:50.200 --> 1:26:53.080
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, and Billy Carlson is the one guy. Yeah, I'd

1:26:53.080 --> 1:26:54.920
<v Speaker 4>said the one guy in the entire system where it's like,

1:26:55.080 --> 1:26:56.960
<v Speaker 4>he's not the one I'm moving, He's the one. He's

1:26:57.000 --> 1:26:59.479
<v Speaker 4>so good defensive there should be so good defensively. He's

1:26:59.479 --> 1:27:01.560
<v Speaker 4>the one I would potentially be moving other people for.

1:27:02.520 --> 1:27:04.479
<v Speaker 4>I'm sorry, I should clarify when I say moving, I

1:27:04.520 --> 1:27:06.439
<v Speaker 4>mean moving to a different position, not moving.

1:27:06.240 --> 1:27:07.040
<v Speaker 1>To a different team.

1:27:07.200 --> 1:27:09.559
<v Speaker 4>When it comes to trading him, I actually agree with

1:27:09.600 --> 1:27:11.920
<v Speaker 4>Michael that he seems to be the odd man out.

1:27:12.400 --> 1:27:15.320
<v Speaker 4>But to that point, the timing is what's interesting, because

1:27:15.600 --> 1:27:17.360
<v Speaker 4>I wouldn't say you're selling low on him right now.

1:27:17.439 --> 1:27:19.799
<v Speaker 4>He's having a fine season, even though it's been interrupted

1:27:19.840 --> 1:27:22.760
<v Speaker 4>by injury, and he's back now of course, But I

1:27:22.760 --> 1:27:25.040
<v Speaker 4>wouldn't be surprised if at this time next year, Billy

1:27:25.040 --> 1:27:28.200
<v Speaker 4>Carlson is like, maybe not a Caleb Bonamer level prospect,

1:27:28.360 --> 1:27:30.960
<v Speaker 4>but still viewed as a better prospect than he has

1:27:31.000 --> 1:27:32.800
<v Speaker 4>now because the defense is what it is. But they've

1:27:32.840 --> 1:27:35.120
<v Speaker 4>unlocked something with a swing by that he's seen as

1:27:35.120 --> 1:27:39.240
<v Speaker 4>a more higher ceiling player than he was when he

1:27:39.280 --> 1:27:40.800
<v Speaker 4>was drapped. I would not be surprised if that were

1:27:40.840 --> 1:27:43.000
<v Speaker 4>the case, and then next year at the deadline or

1:27:43.040 --> 1:27:45.240
<v Speaker 4>in the winter whenever it is, that's when you can

1:27:45.360 --> 1:27:47.439
<v Speaker 4>really strike when the iron is hot and get something

1:27:47.880 --> 1:27:50.120
<v Speaker 4>a lot better. That's just my two cents. I kind

1:27:50.120 --> 1:27:52.799
<v Speaker 4>of believe in the idea that they will unlock something

1:27:52.800 --> 1:27:54.600
<v Speaker 4>more with his bat because I have a lot of

1:27:54.600 --> 1:27:56.760
<v Speaker 4>faith in the White soxs that in development these days,

1:27:56.800 --> 1:27:59.519
<v Speaker 4>So I would be a little upset to trade him now,

1:28:00.000 --> 1:28:01.040
<v Speaker 4>although I would understand it.

1:28:01.800 --> 1:28:03.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, the early signs with this bat, by the way,

1:28:03.880 --> 1:28:06.559
<v Speaker 3>have been good. Like he struggled his first month of

1:28:06.600 --> 1:28:08.880
<v Speaker 3>pro ball, but like after that, before the injury, he

1:28:09.040 --> 1:28:11.679
<v Speaker 3>was really picking things up, and then he's actually been

1:28:12.000 --> 1:28:14.839
<v Speaker 3>hitting really well since he got back from that injury.

1:28:14.880 --> 1:28:18.040
<v Speaker 3>So like whatever adjustments they've already made with him, that's

1:28:18.040 --> 1:28:21.040
<v Speaker 3>already panning out, and that's why he was a top

1:28:21.040 --> 1:28:25.800
<v Speaker 3>ten pick was because he was probably imib ready defensively

1:28:26.120 --> 1:28:28.040
<v Speaker 3>out of high school. That's how good he was with

1:28:28.080 --> 1:28:31.599
<v Speaker 3>the glove. But he also does have legitimate upside at

1:28:31.600 --> 1:28:34.040
<v Speaker 3>the plate, and they're already starting to unlock that. So

1:28:34.120 --> 1:28:36.960
<v Speaker 3>I agree, like his air was pointing up and do

1:28:37.280 --> 1:28:40.400
<v Speaker 3>you sell that now if he can get you a

1:28:40.479 --> 1:28:43.040
<v Speaker 3>readebt rs, I'm open to that, but like you might

1:28:43.240 --> 1:28:45.080
<v Speaker 3>get better value for him if you let him play

1:28:45.080 --> 1:28:45.639
<v Speaker 3>a full season.

1:28:45.640 --> 1:28:50.479
<v Speaker 2>First, I will kind of close my final thoughts here

1:28:50.479 --> 1:28:53.240
<v Speaker 2>and then pass it back to Duke to bring us

1:28:53.600 --> 1:28:55.160
<v Speaker 2>to a close here. This has, first of all, been

1:28:55.160 --> 1:28:57.800
<v Speaker 2>an awesome episode. The chat you all have been incredible.

1:28:58.400 --> 1:29:00.360
<v Speaker 2>Hopefully we got some most of your questions, a lot

1:29:00.400 --> 1:29:03.040
<v Speaker 2>of comments coming in quite often nothing I have a

1:29:03.080 --> 1:29:06.519
<v Speaker 2>concern with more with that obviously, just more so it's

1:29:06.520 --> 1:29:08.479
<v Speaker 2>hard for me to keep track, so if I missed something,

1:29:08.520 --> 1:29:10.920
<v Speaker 2>I apologize. The second thing I'll say is kind of

1:29:10.920 --> 1:29:13.280
<v Speaker 2>my closing thoughts on this question as well as all

1:29:13.320 --> 1:29:16.000
<v Speaker 2>of them. When we talk about the amount of shortstops

1:29:16.840 --> 1:29:19.680
<v Speaker 2>that are in the White Sox system, I remember not

1:29:19.760 --> 1:29:22.639
<v Speaker 2>too long ago when in the last rebuild they had

1:29:22.680 --> 1:29:27.720
<v Speaker 2>too many outfielders for the spots and what are they

1:29:27.720 --> 1:29:29.040
<v Speaker 2>going to do with all these guys? And none of

1:29:29.120 --> 1:29:33.840
<v Speaker 2>them made it except for Robert. And that's where my

1:29:33.920 --> 1:29:36.519
<v Speaker 2>opinion of if there are certain guys you can move,

1:29:36.960 --> 1:29:41.120
<v Speaker 2>move them now when you've got this team where it

1:29:41.200 --> 1:29:44.200
<v Speaker 2>is ahead of expectations. If you've got some pieces you

1:29:44.200 --> 1:29:46.840
<v Speaker 2>can move, move them now, because you never know what

1:29:46.920 --> 1:29:50.720
<v Speaker 2>a development looks like long term. Yes, the difference with

1:29:50.800 --> 1:29:52.320
<v Speaker 2>infielders is a lot of times you can move them

1:29:52.360 --> 1:29:55.160
<v Speaker 2>to the outfield and you're fine. That's why it's a

1:29:55.200 --> 1:29:58.599
<v Speaker 2>little bit different. But we've been here before. I would

1:29:58.680 --> 1:30:01.320
<v Speaker 2>love to see the White Sox kind of take what

1:30:01.360 --> 1:30:04.760
<v Speaker 2>they've done a great job building and find ways to

1:30:04.800 --> 1:30:07.160
<v Speaker 2>supplement it. Knowing that, Nick, to your point, I have

1:30:07.200 --> 1:30:09.400
<v Speaker 2>faith in what this development team can do on the

1:30:09.400 --> 1:30:17.280
<v Speaker 2>offensive side, especially Let's see if they can be advantageous

1:30:17.320 --> 1:30:19.080
<v Speaker 2>with how they move some guys as well and keep

1:30:19.120 --> 1:30:22.280
<v Speaker 2>others and continue to develop them. So but now, seriously,

1:30:22.360 --> 1:30:27.200
<v Speaker 2>awesome stream with everyone who was in the chat. You

1:30:27.240 --> 1:30:29.160
<v Speaker 2>guys were awesome back and forth. Like I said, I

1:30:29.160 --> 1:30:33.559
<v Speaker 2>couldn't follow everything, but I appreciate everyone throwing their thoughts

1:30:33.600 --> 1:30:35.320
<v Speaker 2>in and I hope we got to almost all of

1:30:35.360 --> 1:30:37.360
<v Speaker 2>your questions and thanks to everyone who sent them in

1:30:37.400 --> 1:30:39.479
<v Speaker 2>ahead of time as well. That was awesome too.

1:30:40.600 --> 1:30:42.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, before we close out, I just want to I

1:30:42.840 --> 1:30:45.960
<v Speaker 1>want to do a shout out to my boy, are

1:30:46.000 --> 1:30:49.160
<v Speaker 1>the one probably the one Socks on thirty fifth fan

1:30:49.240 --> 1:30:53.240
<v Speaker 1>in Texas, Zach Hill, for sending me questions. Zach. As

1:30:53.320 --> 1:30:55.840
<v Speaker 1>you've probably realized at this point, all your questions got

1:30:55.880 --> 1:30:58.040
<v Speaker 1>answered because other people ended up asking them, but I

1:30:58.120 --> 1:31:02.879
<v Speaker 1>wanted to shout you out because you're my boy. But anyway, No, seriously,

1:31:02.960 --> 1:31:06.360
<v Speaker 1>everyone in the chat has been great. I got a

1:31:06.360 --> 1:31:08.759
<v Speaker 1>lot of entertainment reading you guys go back and forth.

1:31:08.800 --> 1:31:10.960
<v Speaker 1>There was a lot of really good, good ideas in

1:31:11.000 --> 1:31:13.680
<v Speaker 1>here too. Never would have thought when we started this

1:31:13.800 --> 1:31:17.080
<v Speaker 1>that we would have had a full blown center field discussion,

1:31:17.120 --> 1:31:20.120
<v Speaker 1>which I actually really appreciate because it's been kind of

1:31:20.160 --> 1:31:21.920
<v Speaker 1>keeping me up at night probably the last couple of

1:31:21.960 --> 1:31:26.920
<v Speaker 1>months here. So yeah, always appreciated, always appreciate all the fans.

1:31:26.920 --> 1:31:30.280
<v Speaker 1>But I think with that, ladies and gentlemen, that's all

1:31:30.320 --> 1:31:33.559
<v Speaker 1>we have this week for the Socks on thirty fifth podcast.

1:31:33.720 --> 1:31:37.840
<v Speaker 1>Also Joe did pop into the chat and say, Michael,

1:31:37.840 --> 1:31:41.120
<v Speaker 1>this was your twenty sixth appearance on the podcast. I

1:31:41.160 --> 1:31:43.720
<v Speaker 1>knew it was in the twenties, so apparently you can

1:31:43.760 --> 1:31:46.400
<v Speaker 1>only make you can make a first impression twenty six times,

1:31:46.400 --> 1:31:52.040
<v Speaker 1>so until with you, that'll be twenty seven. Be sure

1:31:52.040 --> 1:31:54.679
<v Speaker 1>subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, and anywhere

1:31:54.680 --> 1:31:56.960
<v Speaker 1>else to hear your podcast. Also sure check out the

1:31:57.000 --> 1:31:59.400
<v Speaker 1>website sucks on thirty fifth dot com as while selling

1:31:59.479 --> 1:32:02.559
<v Speaker 1>us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram at socks on thirty fifty.

1:32:02.560 --> 1:32:05.559
<v Speaker 1>Stay up to date with YO Chicago White Sox. This

1:32:05.600 --> 1:32:08.679
<v Speaker 1>has been Duke Coughlin joined by Jordan Losowski, Nick Gower

1:32:08.960 --> 1:32:12.120
<v Speaker 1>and Michael Sorrow. We'll be back as we cover another

1:32:12.160 --> 1:32:16.960
<v Speaker 1>week of White Sox baseball. Uh, thank you and got

1:32:16.960 --> 1:32:20.440
<v Speaker 1>socks and shout out to John Striffin your first calling, Uh,

1:32:20.520 --> 1:32:24.160
<v Speaker 1>your call on Moon's first home run was fantastic.

1:32:25.439 --> 1:32:27.160
<v Speaker 2>Go socks. Thank you boys, and thank you to the

1:32:27.240 --> 1:32:29.080
<v Speaker 2>chat again and everyone who sent in questions.

1:32:29.840 --> 1:32:32.160
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, THO sucks the Socks