The White Sox Are Collapsing Toward Immortality

Kevin Jairaj-USA TODAY Sports

The 2024 season started absolutely terribly for the White Sox. After 25 games, the team’s record stood at 3-22, thanks in large part to an anemic offense that barely scored two runs per game. At the time – the Sox were 3-21 when I wrote the piece – I posed the question of whether the White Sox had a real shot at losing 120 games. I concluded that it was possible, with ZiPS projecting an 8.1% chance that Chicago would lose 120 games, better odds than even the Oakland A’s during their brutal 2023 season. That appeared to be the end of the story, at least until July.

After the awful start, things got slightly sunnier for the Sox for awhile. They swept the Tampa Bay Rays, a team expected to be a contender, and over the next not-so-nice 69 games, they went 24-45. While a .348 winning percentage isn’t in the same zip code as competence, that’s a 56-win pace, a level of lousiness that is fairly commonplace for the worst teams in the league, not the stuff of legend. But as the trade deadline approached, things again turned grim.

The White Sox won the first game of a doubleheader against the Twins on July 10, improving their record to 27-67. That date, almost a month ago, was the last time the White Sox won a game. The team’s 21 straight losses ties them with the 1988 Orioles for the second-most consecutive losses in modern baseball history (since 1901), just two losses behind the biggest loser, the 1961 Philadelphia Phillies. In some sense, the current one might be the most impressive losing streak, simply because the differences between the best and worst teams in baseball has shrunk over the years, making streaks like this more challenging to achieve.

And no, the White Sox haven’t been unlucky. Using a modified Pythagorean winning percentage (I use 1.83 for the exponent rather than two, as it’s been slightly more accurate historically), the White Sox have been the fourth-worst team since 1901.

Worst Teams, Modified Pythagorean Win Percentage
Year Team W L Pct Modified Pythag
1942 Philadelphia Phils 42 109 .278 .256
1916 Philadelphia Athletics 36 117 .235 .267
1909 Washington Nationals 42 110 .276 .269
2024 Chicago White Sox 27 88 .235 .272
1904 Washington Senators 38 113 .252 .275
1908 St. Louis Cardinals 49 105 .318 .278
1910 St. Louis Browns 47 107 .305 .286
1915 Philadelphia Athletics 43 109 .283 .290
1919 Philadelphia Athletics 36 104 .257 .292
1932 Boston Red Sox 43 111 .279 .293
1954 Philadelphia Athletics 51 103 .331 .294
1905 Brooklyn Superbas 48 104 .316 .299
1969 San Diego Padres 52 110 .321 .299
1906 Boston Nationals 49 102 .325 .300
1941 Philadelphia Phillies 43 111 .279 .301
1903 Washington Senators 43 94 .314 .302
2023 Oakland Athletics 50 112 .309 .302
1945 Philadelphia Phillies 46 108 .299 .303
1903 St. Louis Cardinals 43 94 .314 .304
2019 Detroit Tigers 47 114 .292 .304

If the season ended today, the White Sox would have the worst modified Pythagorean win percentage in more than 80 years, since the Philadelphia Phils in 1942. No, that’s not a typo; the Phillies officially shortened their team name for a season in 1942, apparently because they decided they didn’t want to have the same name as the line of cigars.

Problem is, the season doesn’t end today, so the Sox haven’t closed the deal yet. Regression toward the mean is a real thing, and one of the primary reasons why people overrate teams when things are going very well, and vice-versa. At the end of the day, a .235 winning percentage or the .272 in modified Pythag are likely – though not guaranteed – to go up over the remaining games. Projections represent a more stable description of a team’s ability, as well as one that’s generally more predictive of the future, and even with the diminished post-deadline roster, ZiPS sees the White Sox as “only” a .355 team, a 58-104 pace that represents merely a ho-hum level of awfulness.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

But it’s also likely that given more games, these other terrible teams likely would have played better ball as well, for similar reasons. (Remember, Major League Baseball didn’t implement the current 162-game schedule until 1961.) While ZiPS projections date back to 2005, I have a quick little estimator for a team’s underlying ability that correlates fairly well with projections; it’s a mix of actual record, a team’s “wRC Pythagorean” — which uses wRC rather than runs score and allowed — and a model of regression toward .500. So I calculated the worst teams by this method and compared them to Chicago’s .356 estimate.

Estimate of Worst Teams (Since 1901)
Year Team W L Pct Pythag Team Strength
1915 Philadelphia Athletics 43 109 .283 .290 .328
1904 Washington Nationals 38 113 .252 .275 .340
1916 Philadelphia Athletics 36 117 .235 .267 .348
1910 St. Louis Browns 47 107 .305 .286 .354
1932 Boston Red Sox 43 111 .279 .293 .354
1952 Pittsburgh Pirates 42 112 .273 .312 .355
1909 Washington Nationals 42 110 .276 .269 .355
2024 Chicago White Sox 27 88 .235 .272 .356
1963 New York Mets 51 111 .315 .311 .357
1942 Philadelphia Phils 42 109 .278 .256 .357
1962 New York Mets 40 120 .250 .313 .359
2003 Detroit Tigers 43 119 .265 .305 .360
1945 Philadelphia Phillies 46 108 .299 .303 .360
1909 Boston Doves 45 108 .294 .305 .360
1919 Philadelphia Athletics 36 104 .257 .292 .361
1911 St. Louis Browns 45 107 .296 .341 .361
1920 Philadelphia Athletics 48 106 .312 .324 .361
1903 St. Louis Cardinals 43 94 .314 .304 .361
1939 St. Louis Browns 43 111 .279 .347 .365
1965 New York Mets 50 112 .309 .318 .365

Whew, the White Sox once again fall to satisfyingly hurlicious levels as the worst team since the 1952 Pirates. And the thing is that for the Sox, a .355 record is lousy enough that they stand an excellent chance at losing 120 games anyway with the number of losses they already have banked. With 47 games to play, a .355 record would net them only 16.7 wins, leaving them at just under a 44-118 record, tantalizingly close to the 1962 Mets standard. And since we know that projections aren’t perfect, or at least maybe reality isn’t, that gives the White Sox ample room to continue to underperform and take the grand prize. Luckily, ZiPS can take care of that estimate.

ZiPS Projected Wins Chicago White Sox
Percentile Wins
99% 52.9
95% 50.2
90% 48.8
85% 47.8
80% 47.0
75% 46.3
70% 45.7
65% 45.1
60% 44.6
55% 44.1
50% 43.6
45% 43.1
40% 42.6
35% 42.1
30% 41.6
25% 41.0
20% 40.3
15% 39.6
10% 38.7
5% 37.4
1% 35.1

Even with things projected not to go quite as badly, ZiPS gives the White Sox a slightly better than one-in-three chance (34%) to lose 120 games. And it could get even worse, with a 1% projected shot of finishing with a 35-127 record (or worse). That is championship brutality right there. The amusing thing is that this probability could’ve been even higher, but the White Sox didn’t trade Garrett Crochet or Luis Robert Jr. at the deadline, leaving the team encumbered with an additional 2-3 wins. If I remove Crochet and Robert Jr. in favor of their likely sub-replacement replacements, ZiPS projects the Pale Hose to have a 66% chance of losing at least 120 games!

I’m not sure I’d go so far as to call it a silver lining, but hope remains even for the most woeful teams in baseball. The last team to make a serious late run at 120 losses, the 2003 Tigers, improved quickly in the following seasons and made it to the World Series just three years later. Those 1952 Pirates were in the middle of a full rebuild helmed by legendary general manager Branch Rickey, hired in ’51, and though health problems forced him to step down in ’55, the organization assembled many of the key players who were on the World Series-winning team in ’60. And let’s not forget that seven years after losing 120 games, the Mets won the 1969 World Series. White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf isn’t one to embrace change, but a disaster of epic proportions could, in theory, be the one thing that would prompt him to overhaul the organization. I wouldn’t say I’m terribly optimistic about this actually happening, but with an improved farm system – we now rank Chicago’s farm as the third best in baseball – and maybe a better front office assembled, the Sox could turn things around.

Whether the White Sox have a brighter future is something we’ll have to wait to find out. For now, enjoy these Sox as they reach new levels of ineptitude, because they may be the worst major league team you’ll ever see.





Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.

86 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Fredchuckdave
1 year ago

Thanks Dan, lifelong White Sox fan and this is the most exciting thing since 2005

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago

You might reduce Crochet’s contributions since they’re tapering his workload. One other fun fact… As pointed out by Jim Margalus yesterday, they are now 0-54 in games where they are trailing after the 6th inning. And I’m not sure where exactly to query this but the Sox must be on pace to shatter some offense records too. They just can’t score.

maguroMember since 2016
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

“We’re never gonna score” – Beavis

Vernon Wells' Agent
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

That means they are only 27-34 when leading or tied after 6 innings, which seems nearly as terrible.

elisbedwynn
1 year ago

As a fan of some pretty lousy teams over the years, there’s something endearing about this level of ineptitude.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  elisbedwynn

It begins last year: they were pretty bad, and had a trade-deadline firesale, starting a new rebuild and of course guaranteeing this year would be bad too. Then they fired the GM and President. The owner started talking about moving the team. Oh and somebody got shot in the stadium. This year, they’re losing like there’s no tomorrow. The manager’s career record is 189-88 at this point. 21 consecutive losses and counting.

It’s epic.

elisbedwynn
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

I meant enduring in the sense of what you see on the field. Obviously when you zoom out it’s cynical. Either way, it’s something to behold

Last edited 1 year ago by elisbedwynn
KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  elisbedwynn

For me, last year, the peak of absurdity was the person being shot (on accident) in the stadium. At the time it felt like the cherry on top of a pile of poo, but now it feels like it was an omen of things to come. I am not cynical, exactly, and I’m not amused exactly either. It just feels like I’m looking into something unreal, an unsolveable riddle, an abyss.

formerly matt wMember since 2025
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

Looks like the investigation into the shooting has been of a piece witht eh rest of the story. Someone leaked a rumor that it was an accidental discharge of a gun that one of the injured women snuck in in the folds of her belly fat, then sources were pointing to ShotSpotter reports a mile south of the ballpark (ShotSpotter is the fielding percentage of forensics), it seems like the last update is that in February the police said they would release a final report soon, and overall seems like nobody has any idea what happened.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago

I actually think that rumor is the most likely, and I think Jerry is burying it to spare his security the embarrassment.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
1 year ago

Wow, someone got shot on the south side of Chicago?

Jason BMember since 2017
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

The manager’s career record is 189-88 at this point. 

That’s a .682 HOF pace right there! That can’t be right

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Jason B

Haha yeah got that flipped!

marchandman34Member since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

88-189, but yes!

The Ghost of Johnny Dickshot
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

Even when they were good a couple years I remember reading, maybe here on this site, how absolutely awful the clubhouse was…guess they haven’t fixed that.

LeCheffre
1 year ago

Reporting from on the ground here south of Madison in Cook County,Illinois. Reinsdorf remains the slumlord of the minor leagues. So while the current prospect pedigree is much increased, I highly doubt that GM Getz is going to pull a Branch Rickey and get those prospects to mature to their potential.

The prototypical rebuild led by a tanking is three years of being the worst team in the league, and trading most parts for prospect capital. The Astros and Orioles did it, and here in Chicago, the Blackhawks did it while sharing space with Reinsdor: preferred asset, the Bulls.

A third season of absolute suck probably doesn’t work with Jerry’s timeline for either getting stadium money, or moving out of Chicago. While I don’t want to see the Sox leave, I also think his stadium money would be rewarding his bad behavior and putting the citizens through additional taxation towards a bad actor’s sole benefit.

There are larger things wrong in Soxville.

I can’t help but feel this is all a result of a Curse of Charlie Comiskey and the Black Sox.

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
1 year ago
Reply to  LeCheffre

Does moving out of Chicago mean Schaumburg or Charlotte?

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Ivan_Grushenko

Reinsdorf has been picking a fight with the governor of Illinois. It’s about moving states. This is what he did in the late ’80s. He threatened to move to Tampa until the state stepped in and funded New Comiskey. The story goes that he seemed so serious, Tampa actually built Tropicana to attract them.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  LeCheffre

If there is one* city that should call a team’s bluff, it’s Chicago. There is absolutely no way they make as much money in any of these smaller markets as they do in a normal year in Chicago.

—-
*more than one city should call a team’s bluff, but Chicago is pretty far to one side of not needing to fund stadiums

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

They wouldn’t even miss the White Sox at a fiscal level. It’s only the fans who would care

MikeSMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Day to day, yes. They can have a bigger fanbase to draw from in Chicago than in Charlotte or Nashville. Even competing with the Cubs. Chicago is just a much bigger media market.

But the big money in MLB and other pro sports doesn’t come from the fans these days. It doesn’t even come from the TV rights, especially with RSN”s collapsing. It comes from free stadiums. Chicago and (especially) Illinois seem reluctant to give them a billion dollars of public subsidy but if they can convince Tennessee or North Carolina to do so, that’s worth more than a few million fans.

Shalesh
1 year ago
Reply to  MikeS

But the big money in MLB and other pro sports…comes from free stadiums.”

The White Sox currently only pay the Illinois Sports Authority $1.5M in rent for Guaranteed Rate. Even if that went to zero, how are the White Sox making “big money”? They can’t sell a new stadium that is owned by the state. They’ll probably have MLB’s 4th lowest 1.4M in attendance this year. Is that “big money”? In other words, teams make money from their baseball operations.

Forbes has the White Sox organic revenue as only $288M in 2023, $276M in 2022, and $258M in 2021. (They won the AL Central in 2021.) By contrast, the Pirates did $309M, $262M, and $258M in those years. Thus, either Forbes is wildly and uniquely wrong about the White Sox or the White Sox revenue base is that of a small-market team. Thus, I’m not sure they would make less money in a smaller market.

I don’t think it will come to that. Illinois and Chicago haven’t said “no” to any new spending for over 75 years and haven’t really haggled too much with suppliers (including Labor) on expenses. Just spend, baby!

thaaldermanMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Shalesh

– “Thus either Forbes is wildly uniquely wrong about the White Sox or the White revenue base is that of a small-market team.”

I’m sorry, but what evidence do we have that Forbes’s estimates are remotely accurate in the first place?

Shalesh
1 year ago
Reply to  thaalderman

If you add up all organic team revenues on Forbes, you get what MLBPA accepts as total MLB revenue. That why we use Forbes.

How do you estimate White Sox revenue?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  Shalesh

Those numbers don’t add up, which would indicate either terrible business decisions for the White Sox or some questionable data. I’m just looking at the 2022 numbers right now; it has the White Sox listed at $276M in 2022 and the Pirates at $262M. But the White Sox outdrew the Pirates by 9,000 fans a game and made something like $70M more in TV money than the Pirates in that general time period. I’m not sure whether those estimates are wrong for the Pirates or White Sox but the gap should be bigger than that, even with revenue sharing.

Of course, “should” be bigger than that can mean a couple of different things. One possibility is that the numbers for either the Pirates or the White Sox are wrong. The other possibility is that the White Sox are such a uniquely bad business organization that they barely made more money than the Pirates despite drawing 45% more fans and having 2.5x the TV deal. The first one is bad enough, but the second one would imply that the White Sox would do a whole lot worse in Pittsburgh than the Pirates do.

It gets worse:
-I *think* if the White Sox wanted to get revenue sharing by moving to Nashville or Charlotte or wherever MLB would have to bargain for that in the next CBA. So that’s not a guarantee to happen.
-Although the stadium in a new place would be either partially or entirely paid for by Nashville or Charlotte or wherever, they would have at least a few seasons as a lame-duck in Chicago or in a minor league stadium somewhere else, which would obviously be bad for them.
-The team would have to start over from scratch developing a new fanbase. I think you could argue in the case of a team like the Athletics that’s entirely irrelevant, but the White Sox have been in Chicago for over 100 years.

Last edited 1 year ago by sadtrombone
Shalesh
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/01/each-teams-local-broadcasting-arrangement.html

Has Pirates TV Revenue at $50-$60M and the White Sox at $60M, so I’m not sure where you’re seeing a $70M differential.

I also see the gap in attendance at 5,000 fans per game rather than 9,000. Possible that Pirates ticket prices are higher or they get more money from road attendance (Milwaukee, St Louis, and the Cubs all draw more than the AL Central).

Shalesh
1 year ago
Reply to  Shalesh

Moreover, 5000 fans/game * $40 ticket * 80 games = $16M, so it’s not a huge advantage for the White Sox over the Pirates.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Shalesh

Pritzker called the last proposed plan a “non-starter” so I do think the climate has shifted a bit.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  MikeS

Unless the stadium itself provides new streams of revenue independent of the number of fans or TV subscribers I’m not seeing how this adds up. I suppose it’s possible if you have huge numbers of luxury boxes that sell out or something like that, but you have to have enough people willing to pay $5K for a suite or something like that and there’s no guarantee they’d sell more in Nashville / Charlotte than Chicago even if they built more.

Lanidrac
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Well, if it’s a choice between a free stadium in Nashville or paying for a new stadium in Chicago, you can kind of see the point. I just think it would hurt the franchise too much long term, plus I really don’t see them leaving Chicago.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lanidrac
Lanidrac
1 year ago
Reply to  MikeS

That really makes up for the difference in local revenue over the next 35 to 40 years combined?

Then again, Reinsdorf isn’t going to live anywhere near that long, anyway, so I guess he doesn’t care about the long term consequences.

Last edited 1 year ago by Lanidrac
airforce21oneMember since 2026
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

If all of the cities called all of the bluffs, taxpayers wouldn’t have to fund any stadiums (stadia?)

thaaldermanMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  LeCheffre

I wish people would exercise basic critical thinking skills instead of mindlessly repeating this canard about the White Sox leaving Chicago for Nashville (or some similarly sized city).

MLB is not going to allow a team to move to a metro with 1/5 the people and 1/4 the wealth that their current city has, especially when they’re seriously considering nationalizing television rights. Moreover, owners are not going to depress their upcoming billion dollar plus expansion fee(s) by removing one of the most serious candidates from the board. Oakland/Las Vegas is a unique situation that doesn’t apply here either.

Jerry Reinsdorf is an ancient, one-trick pony playing (or more accurately, implying that he might play) the only card he knows as a transparent ploy to gain leverage in negotiations with the city and state. The entire thing is a complete farce, and taking his threats seriously only empowers him.

bglick4
1 year ago

I guess the 2018 Orioles with their 47 wins just missed the cut. That team was bad and had a terrible farm. Though if their farm really is good, I think they should look to the 52 win 2021 team for hope. That team was a year from a wildcard race and two years from 100+ wins.

Jason BMember since 2017
1 year ago
Reply to  bglick4

Man, from a 47-win disaster in 2018 to a stocked farm system and loads of young talent in like five years. I’m so envious!

Cordially,
Sad Jays Fan

Scotty GMember since 2020
1 year ago

I would like to see them follow in the 2003 Tigers footsteps by hiring Dave Dombrowski and spending big on all-star free agents, but I don’t think we’ll see that as long as Reinsdorf is in charge.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Scotty G

I don’t know, I strangely think it could happen. You have this 88 year old, who hired his GM specifically to turn the team around quickly. You have no ability to get anyone who can hit from the farm anytime soon. They didn’t trade their two best players at the deadline. Maybe they do go big on free agents this offseason? Popular misconception about Reinsdorf is that he’s a low-payroll owner. Historically, it ebbs and flows.

On the other hand, the last big signing they made was Andrew Benintendi.

natebby35
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

He is a low-payroll owner. When it was high the last few years it was done in the cheapest way possible with a bunch of short-term contracts handed out mostly to relievers. Payroll commitments are down to Benintendi and almost nothing else after this year. Sox are one of two teams that have never handed out a nine figure contract. Jerry has refused to take an actual risk for the entirety of his ownership.

With attendance very understandably cratering this season and the Sox launching a new channel with the Bulls and Blackhawks that’s still up in the air and also Jerry being incapable of experiencing shame, I would be shocked if they spend much this winter.

sisk96
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

Reinsdorf IS a low-payroll owner, at least when it comes to free agents. That’s not a misconception. As you say, their biggest ever free-agent signing is Andrew Benintendi, who was the 25th biggest contract in baseball at the time. Before that it was Yasmani Grandal who was 57th. Before that, Paul Konerko who was 26th. The last time the White Sox signed a free agent to even a top 20 contract in baseball was in 1997, 27 years ago (Albert Belle). But sure, maybe Jerry can get Juan Soto. Who knows?

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  sisk96

I’m just saying if you take the past 20 years you’ll see a team with a few payrolls in the top ten, bottom ten, and middle ten.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago

I always get my hopes up that this is the year that a team is finally so bad that they finish with a worse record than the 2003 Tigers. I think this is the latest in the season we’ve gotten with this much promise (if you can call it that) of dethroning the 2003 Tigers.

To me, the 2003 Tigers are the pinnacle / nadir of badness, because there are no excuses. The early 60s Mets were an expansion team, the Philadelphia Athletics teams were bad because they sold all their players because of financial issues, etc. You could maybe make a case for the 1952 Pirates, where they effectively decided to see what AA team would look like if it played in the majors. But by 2003, the differences between teams just weren’t that great. If you couldn’t win 45 games you were an enormous outlier.

The idea that the White Sox are on pace to beat the 2003 Tigers and also maybe the expansion Mets, and also the 1935 Boston Braves (the one where Babe Ruth retired in the middle of the year) is unbelievable. You know how hard it is to to be this bad? There are too many functional baseball players just hanging around to lose 120 games. You have to be really committed to running below-replacement players out there so consistently. Have some of these players simply given up?

Last edited 1 year ago by sadtrombone
kipsoothMember since 2019
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

yes they have

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
1 year ago
Reply to  kipsooth

Some of them gave up in April!

sisk96
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

This team has played Andrew Benintendi at DH multiple times this year. If nothing else, they are committed to running below-replacement players out there lol

hurricanexyzMember since 2016
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Right, and not that I’ve watched all their games but I don’t feel like they’ve got that same like, ’62 Mets “can’t anybody here play this game??”/”every day they find a new way to lose” zaniness, they know how to play baseball they’re just really bad at it??

Lanidrac
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Effectively, what’s the difference between selling all your players to clear your finances and selling all your players to rebuild the farm system? Either way, you’re purposely selling off as much of your current MLB talent as you reasonably can and not immediately replacing it.

Although, come to think of it, the White Sox didn’t actually tank last offseason, did they?

Last edited 1 year ago by Lanidrac
HappyFunBallMember since 2019
1 year ago

While I’m sure no member of a professional baseball team wants to lose, I feel like there’s value in being legendarily bad. If you’re going to suck, get a good story out of it. They should absolutely go for it

Last edited 1 year ago by HappyFunBall
Jason BMember since 2017
1 year ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

They need to start with a life-sized cardboard cutout of Reinsdorf in his skivvies, then put more clothes on it with each additional loss

thaaldermanMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Jason B

Come on man, you can’t steal Dan’s joke in the comments of his own article.

Really poor form.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago

I am cautiously optimistic that the White Sox are going to continue to lose 70% of their games going forward. They are going to taper off Garrett Crochet’s usage, maybe even shut him down, and they seem pretty reluctant to bite the bullet and cut / permanently bench Benintendi and some of the other bad players.

One thing that I suspect projection systems miss is that players who are below-replacement can stay below-replacement for very long periods of time. I took a look at the ZiPS page RoS projections the other day and there were only 16 players projected to have below-replacement performance going forward, and two of them aren’t even employed by a baseball team at the moment. there I think that the reason for this blind spot is that there are a lot of forces working against bad players staying in the lineup. Bad players either get better, or they get benched or cut, and that means players like late-career Chris Davis don’t show up in the training data.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Minor point on Crochet: Brian Bannister’s comments lately seem to imply that he does not want to shut down any pitcher prematurely if there’s no specific injury, so I assume it will only be a taper. But the other day Crochet threw 4 meh innings and they lost, so it’s not doing much to move the needle either way.

Jason BMember since 2017
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

He has not been very good for a month now. No more than 4 IP in any of his last five starts, 4.15 ERA / 1.38 WHIP over the last month. Not terrible, but not otherworldly like his first half numbers were

thaaldermanMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

He hasn’t gone more than 4 innings or thrown more than 77 pitches in any of his last four starts, so while they can say whatever they want, they’re very clearly limiting his innings.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  thaalderman

That’s what tapering means

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago

I know that this specific mess is not due to anything Getz has done in the last calendar year. His trades have been bad, but that’s not the cause of this.

But it would be tempting to fire him anyway. Not because of his performance at GM (which is bad), not because he shows little ability to run the team (which is true). But because this is a situation where you fire everybody.

EonADSMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Jerry Reinsdorf’s problem here is an inability to fire Jerry Reinsdorf.

MikeSMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

He was director of player development, so the lack of minor leaguers developing prior to this year is on him as well.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  MikeS

Ah, see, but that would require firing him for something he did in his last job, which would require admitting that hiring him was a mistake.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

True, and also why haven’t they fired the manager? That seems like a no-brainer. I don’t think it makes a ton of difference (we’re all sabermetrics guys here right?), but at some point, the losses pile up and you just… fire the manager.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  Kyle

They’re not bringing him back next year so what do they have to lose by firing him now? It’s not like they can lose any more than they have in the past few weeks. There is nowhere to go but up.

Lanidrac
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

What do they have to lose by letting him finish the season? Figuring out an interim manager situation would just make the team even more of a mess.

KyleMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

Grifol is really quite terrible. I don’t think it could get worse.

RMD4
1 year ago

If someone were to offer me even odds for this team to lose at least 121 games, I’d take it. Even after this losing streak ends, things can just spiral again and they’ll just be right back where they are, which is basically the Psych 101 blurb on learned helplessness. They know every night that they’re taking a knife to a gun fight and with an offense this bad, if they fall behind early (they usually do), they feel defeated in the first 3 innings. That’s how you tie all-time losing stream records and that’s how you eventually break the all time loss record.

We’ll see if they complain after the season’s over that the ’62 Mets were rained out twice and they really should have lost 122 that year.

mbs2001
1 year ago

My favorite part of this is the fact that the team interviewed nobody outside of the organization for the GM job last year because Getz promised they could compete in 2024 and didn’t need to rebuild.

Also, Chris Getz was promoted after failing to develop anyone as a farm director. Literally an empty chair would perform better as a GM compared to Chris Getz.

As a lifelong sox follower I’m all in on fun bad mode. Let’s get more post-game comments from Pedro Grifol!

Last edited 1 year ago by mbs2001
sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  mbs2001

What do you mean “promised to compete in 2024?” Trading away Cease doesn’t match that. Maybe he meant he could patch together a .500 team because he didn’t need to do a full teardown? I’d love to hear more context about the thinking of Getz and Reinsdorf.

Psychic... Powerless...
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Here’s Reinsdorf’s justification for hiring Getz: “We want to get better as fast as we possibly can. If I went outside, it would have taken anybody at least a year to evaluate the organization. I could have brought Branch Rickey back. It would have taken him a year to evaluate the organization.”

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago

“I could have brought Branch Rickey back”?! Can Reinsdorf raise the dead?! That sounds extremely lucrative.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
1 year ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Reinsdorf wanted an empty suit as his GM, for obvious reasons. Further, what serious GM would want to work for Reinsdorf?

Not Cole Ragans
1 year ago

I feel silly for going into this season thinking, optimistically, the White Sox could BS their way to a 70-win season just through addition by subtraction and a wave of eager prospects coming up. They had a pretty big roster overhaul, and even if they didn’t add good players they were at least replacing the really bad ones. I underestimated how much of Pedro Grifol there was to unravel.

MikeSMember since 2020
1 year ago

If you took out the 14 and 21 game losing streaks, they would still be the worst team in baseball.

If the 21 game losing streak were a 21 game winning streak, they would be the third worst team in baseball, ahead of only the Rockies and Marlins.

They have rostered 28 position players this year. Only 2 have wRC+ > 100. Pham and Moncada. One is a cardinal and the other has been on the IL since early April. They literally can not field a lineup with a single major league average bat right now.

This might already be the longest time between wins of all time (not counting the off season). It has been 28 days since the White Sox won a game. Philadelphia’s 23 game stretch was only 23 days despite the All Star break because they played more double headers, had only one other off day, and the break was only 3 days long.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
1 year ago
Reply to  MikeS

This is the kind of epic badness that inspire people to write songs, if it doesn’t destroy them first.

grandbranyanMember since 2017
1 year ago

Haven’t won a game since they released Martin Maldonado.

Have gotten -1.9 WAR (last in MLB if you can believe that) from position players age 26 or under.

Also seems worth noting they will pick no higher than 10th in the draft next year with the new Draft Lottery stipulations.

TKDCMember since 2016
1 year ago

The Washington Senators were so bad in the early 1900s that by 1909 they had travelled to the future and gone back to disguise themselves as the 21st century Washington Nationals. Maybe they should have focused on better hitting instead.

willl
1 year ago
Reply to  TKDC

The Washington Baseball Club was called the Senators from 1901-1904, the Nationals from 1905-1955, the Senators from 1956-1960, then a different team (expansion) was created in 1961-1971, which was also called the Senators (and predating all of this was another franchise called the Washington Senators from 1891-1899).

For simplicity, the team is mostly referred to as the Senators, but that’s technically incorrect, as the vast majority of the time, the baseball team there has been called the Nationals (71 seasons) and not the Senators (25 seasons). Walter Johnson, for example, in his 21 year career in DC was never a Senator.

All that to say, Dan is correct.

curt schillings ketchup bottle
1 year ago

Dam you chris Getz and your horrible deadline for denying us history!!!

Last edited 1 year ago by curt schillings ketchup bottle
Max Power
1 year ago

If Austin Hedges were on the White Sox, he’d be the #3 position player by WAR. Hedges has played in 43 games, has taken 100 PA, and has a 20 wRC+.

formerly matt wMember since 2025
1 year ago
Reply to  Max Power

Hedges is funny in and of himself–his framing stats are so ridiculous that Fangraphs has him as an above-average player the last two seasons, with a 24 and 20 wRC+. Not above replacement, above average, with a positive Off+Def. The sum of his wRC+ in 23-24 is smaller than the next-lowest total wRC+ of any other player with 300 PA over that time (Joey Wendle, with 46).

GoodEnoughForMeMember since 2024
1 year ago

I will never forgive the 03 Tigers for winning 3 of their last 4 games to avoid the record. I need to see history.

Ostensibly RidiculousMember since 2020
1 year ago

And if the White Sox still had Cease, Lance Lynn, and Reynaldo Lopez (and Fedde) to go along with Crochet, there is a serious argument that they’d have the best starting rotation in MLB.
And that still wouldn’t net them anywhere close to enough WAR to not be the worst team.

Ostensibly RidiculousMember since 2020
1 year ago

Also the 2024 White Sox are basically league average in payroll.
When was the last time an average funded team was this bad?5

airforce21oneMember since 2026
1 year ago

Whaat? Who is making money on that team?

maguroMember since 2016
1 year ago
Reply to  airforce21one

Benintendi $17M, Moncada $24M, Robert $12M

And apparently they’re paying Max Stassi $7M for some reason.

Last edited 1 year ago by maguro
nelliseMember since 2024
1 year ago
Reply to  maguro

Atlanta sent the Sox most of Stassi’s salary so they’re only paying the minimum.

But they’ve also paid Leury Garcia 5.5M the last 2 seasons to not play for them.

bosoxforlifeMember since 2016
1 year ago

The travails of the 2024 White Sox have created quite an interesting situation. Again it is one in which their performance is such an extreme outlier that statistics look foolish when they attempt to explain it. Is this team going to break the modern record, since 1901, for losses in a single season? Is regression to the mean real, of course, but in what time frame. This upcoming stretch of 47 games is such a brief period that it is virtually impossible to actually have any certainty, or even recognize, that a reversion to the mean is occurring. I was pleased to see Dan include, ” At the end of the day, a .235 winning percentage or the .272 in modified Pythag are likely – though not guaranteed – to go up over the remaining games”, and how can we claim to know exactly what the mean of this motley group of baseball players is. The chart shows that the 10% line is a record of 38-124. That seems like a low percentile because that is what an extension of their present record, 11-36 in the last 47 games, would produce. These statistical permutations don’t even begin to take into account that this team is now without Erick Fedde, its leading pitcher in terms of bWAR at 4.7 and a couple of their other modest contributors while adding yet another player to their starting lineup, Miguel Vargas, who has yet to show that he has major league ability. I would not hesitate to predict the White Sox eclipsing the modern era record of 120 losses set by the 1962 New York Mets. Expressing this opinion does not mean that I would be surprised if the White Sox won several more games than that. I understand baseball but I can’t believe that I am mistaken to think that the players are more important than any reversion to the mean and I can’t come to grips with a team, that is already historically bad, jettisoning its MVP and improving even marginally.

ccovilleMember since 2020
1 year ago

Without fail, as soon as Fangraphs publishes an article talking about a thing, the thing stops.

35 Kittle 83Member since 2022
1 year ago
Reply to  ccoville

Like Swing Dancing craze in the 90’s ending when “Friends” had an episode on that.

btw – – Sell the team Jerry !!!!!