GIOin08

1. Javy big year 2. AJ bc of hall 3. Erstad is X factor

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 06:23 PM) jenks gets in shape and this happens. put the weight back on, kid agreed... funny stuff

QUOTE(bogie @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 08:04 AM) Josh with a 3 run bomb today in intrasquad game. 2-2! 3 run bomb... 2-2... gotta love that

i would take him over MB.... basically if he is successful it will drive cub fans nuts

would you take anderson at .255 for the year?

that was a great read... I am shocked that Harrell didn't make it on there but he probably will next year

If you look at Haeger's time with the big club last year, his 1 start was pretty awful, but as a reliever, he had very solid numbers (in limited time of course). And think for a second about having to face, say, Garland-Haeger-Thornton-Jenks. How messed up would you be? I would be messed up against any of them... and i think you would too

QUOTE(bulokis @ Feb 22, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) I am disappointed that we did not trade Vazquez this off-season. I dont know how many wins he will have but I hope he does win more than 12 games because he is getting paid a lot of money. of which we are getting 4 million i think?

can we just start the season already!

Don't forget Javy had great run support, but those ALL came in his wins. He had many bad luck outings. I can see 17 wins... Nostradamus

great article

If the sox can win another couple championships that would change everything

GIO! he dominates in spring and gets the nod

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 23, 2007 -> 05:23 PM) Maybe I'm a psycho, but I'd almost prefer to see Sweeney get the majority of the ABs if Podsednik goes down, just to see if he can hit .270, regardless of the power numbers he puts up. I would almost prefer sosa... did i really just say that

QUOTE(rowand @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 03:09 PM) First off there is something about the MLB barganing agreement that very few (if any) fans know about. The MLB is NOT a split the baby arbitraiton system. It is an all for one or one for all system. Example: Joe Crede claims he should be payed $7 million this upcoming season. The White Sox claim he should be payed $4 million this upcoming season. The 3 arbitraitors rule using many factors including a mathmatical GDP equation and production rating system. They MUST CHOOSE either the $7 million figure or the $4 million figure. They can't determine that $5 million is fair. My thought on why Crede chose to take the $5 million figure is most likely because of the performance clauses and possibly a bonus escalator clause. Those would not be included in a arbitration deal. Also, in arbitration, you have 3 SANE people who use common sense and look at all angles to get the true value of the player to the team within the market. Most players are overpaid compared to their actual performance, so just taking the money is sometimes safer. His injury history and spot as the 4th or 5th best hitter on the team also would hurt his arbitration figure. FYI - The NHL does the "split the baby" arbitration. If Havlat wanted $10 million a year and the Hawks were offering $5 the arbitrators could give anything in between. I need to file for arbitration

The truth is somewhere in the middle. They were probably talent wise a high eighties winning team that way overacheived in 2005, and they were probably a talent wise a low to mid nineties team last year that underachieved. Keep in mind that we got about as much as anyone could hope for from Thome, Dye and Thorton last year. It's not like there weren't people who greatly exceeded expectations despite the disappointments. I'm not sure how anyone could argue this team is better or even as good on paper than the 2006 team for 2007. In my eyes it's at least 5-10 games worse. Now for 2008 and beyond, we will see. But I've been down this road a few times and seen too many Baldwins and Ruffcorns to know that prospects don't mean anything necessarily. assuming the 4 starters are equal to last year, ( i think Buehrle, Vaz, better) yes we will be a mid 80's win team. But if one of these young guys can be a 12-15 game winner, (we will see)... we are talking 90 wins. And then you would hope buehrle is back to normal. And although many don't believe in Vaz on this site... I do... i think he has great stuff and that he will figure it out soon. I don't expect Garland to have another 18 win season. If i had to guess i would say 91 wins

I like

QUOTE(WkdJstr13 @ Dec 12, 2006 -> 10:00 PM) Not that theres anything wrong with it. Ok... this thread has just become creepy

QUOTE(kwill @ Dec 12, 2006 -> 08:47 PM) They have swung and missed twice and i think they need some starting pitching. how about howie kendrik, and brandon wood for uribe, iguchi and garland. Sounds like a deal. you love prospects way too much

I love AJ... But who still watches wrestling?

QUOTE(joeynach @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) Thats a tough thing to estimate. First of all I beleive the radio deal was for something like 2.5 to 3 Mil, the TV deal is much larger and I dont know the specifics, its not exactly public information. 7 Eleven also pays the sox 500K for the new time change. The other revenue you have to estimate, you say like $30 for a ticket, $17 for parking, $20 per person for food and perhaps $10 for souvaneirs at best. I still dont know you just have to estimate and take into account too many factors. Like not everyone pays for parking, not everyone buys beer, blah blah. true... I just want to know if someone has a some "real" figures

that is a great piece

QUOTE(TLAK @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 08:01 AM) In proportion to MLB gross revenue, salaries have actually been declining. Year... Gross Revenue... Player Salaries... Pct 1992... 1,200,000,000...... 805,543,323... 67% 2006... 5,200,000,000... 2,322,299,617... 45% Revenues are up 4.3 times, team salaries only 2.9. Coming off a World Series year, White Sox 2006 salaries were up 3.4 times over the 3rd place 1992 team. Were the Sox to increase salaries to the 1992 MLB ratio the budget would be about $129 Million. Carping over the high cost of players is baloney, there is more money in baseball than ever before. Is it bad that some of the growth money goes to the players, who are the reason you go to the park, or would you prefer it stays in the owners pockets? Revenues quoted from MLB.Com, salaries are from BaseBall Reference. wow... thanks for that information. I guess that just proves that there is a ton of money still going in all the owners pockets. So if say in 92 they broke even that means 33% operating costs outside of salaries. This is probably way down from that figure now... but that would mean @1.7bill in operating costs + 2.3 bill for salaries. That means 1.2 billion leftover for the owners to split which would be 40million a club.

I love the outgoing numbers but can we get a thread/post going on the income? 3million attendence*30= 90mill stadium rev? parking? concessions? TV rev? 670 rev=? mlb.com rev? I just would like to have a better idea of the money they have coming in before i comment on spending.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Dec 8, 2006 -> 03:21 PM) Ya, I've been wondering that too. i don't knwo