There’s never a reason to expect a 12-1 loss, but when considering the fact that Wednesday’s White Sox-Royals game was preceded by bad news for Luis Robert Jr. and not-great news for Colson Montgomery, there’s an urge to write off the entire day in hindsight.
Tuesday’s 5-4 loss, in which Robert played, Montgomery homered and the White Sox led 4-0 through seven innings, is the the more symbolic showing of another disastrous season series against the Royals, especially since the team fell to 9-30 in one-run games.
The White Sox are done with the Royals for the year, and the end result feels like a microcosm of 2025, as any sense of improvement is largely based on the staggering extent of failure the previous year. The 2024 White Sox went 1-12 with a -43 run differential against Kansas City, so when these White Sox finish the year 3-10 and only outscored by 24 runs, sure, it’s terrible, but it could be worse. It’s just that “it could be worse” stops representing progress once this season is over, so they have about 30 games before the novelty of standard-issue putridity wears off.
Speaking of novelty, had I not known how Wednesday’s game had ended, the jubilation expressed by this MLB.com headline would’ve thrown me for a loop.
Lee’s feat would’ve warranted the exclamation point had it the other hallmarks of the 1902 version. It was far more defensible when Frank Isbell and Sam Mertes flipped roles in the battery for that game against the St. Louis Browns, because it was 1) the back end of a doubleheader and 2) the last game of the season. Also, the White Sox finished that year 74-60. Also, the White Sox won that game.
The circumstances of that game have to be investigated a bit, though. The box score reproduced on MLB.com and matching the Retrosheet and Baseball-Reference.com versions, shows Isbell pitching the first inning, and Mertes pitching the last 7⅔ innings (not eight). However, Mertes’ Baseball-Reference.com player page shows him pitching 4 ⅔ innings for the year, and Isbell throwing four. Further bulletins as details are uncovered.
Expansion scoreboard
Prompted by Rob Manfred’s reiteration that he wants two expansion teams named by the time he departs the commissioner’s office in 2029, The Athletic’s Stephen J. Nesbitt sizes up the six most competitive markets at the moment.
It’s a good overview, especially since it highlights the aspects that make Nashville a hollow threat for a swift relocation of the White Sox.
Music City Baseball has spent years building the brand and story of the Nashville Stars — a name borrowed from the city’s Negro league team — and positioning itself as the most natural fit to be MLB’s next team in the east. But at this stage, the group is still missing some critical components of a bid, including a general partner and a stadium site.
Oh, is that it.
Music City Baseball’s managing director says the specific ownership group can be figured out once the new CBA sets the expansion fee for establishing a new franchise, but the stadium site will have to be figured out in 2026, the way it has been in Portland and Salt Lake City. Maybe, but he told the Nashville Banner that securing a general partner was a priority for 2024, and obviously that didn’t happen, so Music City Baseball’s timetables can be taken with a grain of salt, and with the $1.26 billion public subsidy of the Titans’ new stadium setting records, the city isn’t in a position to help a group that can’t help itself.
When presented alongside the other possibilities, it looks weird to see Nashville treated as a presumed front-runner, especially when Raleigh and Orlando are said to have the money men in place, and Orlando even has a stadium site in mind. Nashville’s biggest edge is mindshare. The city itself is a tourist draw the way that Las Vegas is said to be able to support the Athletics, there’s no geographic competition, and players and executives want it because a lot of them already live in Nashville, and training facilities are scattered throughout the area. It makes all the sense in the world until it comes down to who will pay for it.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source soxmachine.com ’
