Greg Hibbard

It seems like we always say "should do this" or "should do that" about individual series, but it rarely plays out that way IMO. I said going in I'd be fine with a 6-3 homestand and I'll stick with that.

yikes.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 09:17 PM) 32,060. What is that, about 5-6k short of capacity? I'd be thrilled with numbers like that from now on.

Seat chart on whitesox.com already showing that the lower deck is almost completely unavailable and the upper is at least half sold....

I thought it was a terrible decision at the time, so I was pretty wrong.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 04:05 PM) August 1st, 2010 White Sox 59-45 Twins 59-46 1/2 GB We didn't surrender the lead for good that year until AUG 12, but then it REALLY got away from us like in a week, it was over. You didn't think we were still in it on this date? I sure did. http://espn.go.com/mlb/standings/_/date/20100906

Since losing 5 series in a row (including four interleague!), the Sox have gone 8-2-1 in the last 11 series, only losing @bos and @det. 5 of 6 against texas, 7 of 9 against minny (inc. 4 road wins), who always plays us tough, 2/3 against TOR who has given us fits in recent years, splitting @nyy....other than those two bad series the sox have been stellar the last 40 days.

It is indeed all very good.

QUOTE (35thstreetswarm @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 02:18 PM) Is your "argument" your attempt to take a joke about Yankee fans and "refute" it point by point like a formal logic problem? Yes, 162-game seasons, followed by successive seven-game series between professional baseball teams, are unlike a large child wrestling a small child in many ways. Nailed it! But back to the main point - the Yankees in recent years (like the last 10 or so) have had some MASSIVE financial advantages. Staggering, really. Especially back in the mid-2000s their payroll often doubled that of even teams near the top of the list, and absolutely dwarfed the bottom half. While that top-level gap has narrowed in the last few years, I'm still amazed they only got one WS out of all that spending. Personally, I would not have much fun watching a team like that, even though they are often in contention, because deep down I'd know they really should win given the way they throw their financial weight around. Now the Yankees of earlier eras? (Including those late '90s teams that didn't have that massive a financial advantage)? A totally different story, and the reason why the Yankees will probably always be on top in terms of overall organizational cachet. I wholeheartedly agree that I nailed it. I'm not sure why you brought up such a convoluted "joke" in the first place. I'm not amazed at all that they only got one WS out of all that spending. Spending money like that only puts you in a position to win. They were 1 win away in both 01 and 03, so by winning 2 more games they could have had 3 instead of 1.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 11:16 AM) After adding the two biggest free agents on the market. Funny how that works. I'm not entirely sure what your argument is, here. My argument: 1) 220 lb wrestlers beat 115 lb wrestlers 100% of the time. 2) No advantage in a seven game series is big enough in any major sport to guarantee that team will win. 3) therefore, the analogy sucks. Also, the Yankees give themselves a big advantage, but they also make excellent personnel decisions that have little to do with that financial advantage. I don't really understand how someone couldn't concede that that last point had SOMETHING to do with their success.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 10:44 AM) You mean the Heat who made it to the NBA finals? And lost. Like the Yanks lost the 01 and 03 series. That analogy makes it seem automatic

QUOTE (35thstreetswarm @ Jul 30, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) Oh, come on, I'm just messing with you. OK - for the era of my fandom (roughly the last 25 years) I'd have to go with Braves and Cardinals in terms of sustained organizational excellence not propelled by outsized financial advantages. Twins and A's still have to be in there for results achieved vs. resources expended, despite recent down years. The Yankees have it in terms of overall organizational cachet, of course, but I can't credit them much in recent years. Given the magnitude of their financial advantage I'm actually surprised they haven't won many more titles. I have to think rooting for the Yankees would be a joyless exercise - sort of like enrolling your 6'2 220 lb. 10th grader in a 7th grade wrestling league full of 115 pounders, then watching matches the from the stands knowing everyone else is rooting against him/you. When he loses it's a shock and disappointment. When he wins it's like "wow. great. congratulations. dick." That's a terrible analogy. Seven game series with teams aren't sure things by any stretch of the imagination. The Yankees have made it as far as the LCS about half the time in the past 15 years. That's a remarkable clip, financial advantage or no. You still have to perform. Ask the 2010-11 Miami Heat.

Any more info on de Aza or ramirez other than "they're out of the lineup"?

Winning in the game of major league baseball means more than playing within the lines. It means spending money wisely within the rules. There are lots of very wealthy sports owners (as well as non sports owners) everywhere. If you want to apologize for the other poor wealthy 29 owners that they couldn't possibly compete with the big bad Yankees, go right ahead. And yes, this is my "who you crappin'" for the week

The cubs have tried to do the same thing the Yankees did for years, so did the Red Sox. Combined, those teams have 2 championships in the past 1 million years.

Southsider, seriously, what's the point of discussion if you are going to set arbitrary guidelines to account for what you don't like about what the game of baseball has patently allowed since the beginning?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 27, 2012 -> 01:40 PM) What about Arod, CC, Tex, Burnett, Soriano, Kuroda, Irabu, Giambi, etc? That is just scouting, right? There's not a player that has had a greater impact on their championships than Mariano Rivera, and it's completely the result of the Yankee scouting and player development. Giambi - no championships. A-Rod - a contributing player to one championship. Many others are contributing players to one or a couple of championships. Rivera - 5 championships. Jeter - 5 championships.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 27, 2012 -> 01:28 PM) The Mets aren't in the conversation because they don't generations of fans the way the Yankees do. They came about in the 60's. Even when the Yankees were a "joke" they were still the highest revenue and most valuable team in all of baseball. On their worst day they have more opportunity than any other major league franchise on its best day. Those opportunities mean everything. What about Jeter, Rivera and Stanton? Just money, right? That's all it ever is? GMAFB.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 27, 2012 -> 11:40 AM) It has nothing to do with the product. It has everything to do with being the original New York City team, in the biggest market in the USA. And yet the Dodgers and Giants both moved despite competing with the Yankees for that biggest market in the USA. The Mets have the same biggest market in the USA and can't even come close. The Cubs have a rabid fanbase, seemingly endless pockets, and the support of a syndicated television station that grew into a national phenomenon (well before the YES network) and they can't even win ONE title. Let's take this example. In 1986, the Yankees were about to head to the doldrums and the Mets rose to the top of the world, literally. 25 years later, the Yankees rebuilt themselves to the tune of 5 more World Titles (including one over the Mets). Why? Because they had deep pockets but also made smart decisions. Like it or not, Jeter is a player out of their system, and 5 teams passed on him (including the 1st pick Astros, whose scout resigned over them passing on it) and they were responsible for grooming Rivera, as well - a "fringe prospect" when they found him. They made many, many smart personnel decisions. Guys like Mike Stanton. I don't think people recall just how much of a joke the Yankees were from about 1988-1994. I was following baseball rabidly in this era (these were my JHS and HS years and I had nothing better to do). The Yanks were a joke - to the extent that they were joked about on the early Seinfeld episodes as being a joke. People treat the Yankees now like they were some self-fulfilling prophecy that occurred because OF COURSE THEY HAD TO. No, they spent money but did so wisely, as well. The Cubs did the same thing but have nothing to show for it - NOTHING.

I see you driving round town with the team I hate, and I'm like f*** YU and a f*** THEM TOO....

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jul 27, 2012 -> 11:20 AM) They are actually run quite poorly. If they only had $100M to work with they'd be screwed. Just look at how many free agent signings have completely blown up on them They are careless with money because they can afford to be, because they've built up such a great product that so significantly better than anything else out there. The Yankees built from the same point everyone else built from. What they've done has worked, far better than any other sports team in America.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jul 27, 2012 -> 11:26 AM) Yeah, dumb poll. The answer is the Yankees and it isn't close.

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Jul 26, 2012 -> 10:21 PM) You don't see the bigger picture here? Money that we've dished out to guys like Dunn, Rios, etc could have been spent elsewhere, thereby making us a perennial World Series contender. That doesn't appeal to you? When have we ever been a legit WS contender during Kenny's reign? You see what I'm getting at now? Oh I dunno - that one time we won the World Series? As for "perennial WS contender" - how many teams have done that over the past 20 years? 3 maximum? That have spent like crazy because they draw like crazy? Given our track record under Schueler, etc. I'll gladly take what Williams has done. There was a time this franchise went 24 years between playoff appearances. If Williams wins the division with the relatively drastic makeover this team has had (Ventura, Sale's transition to starter, Buehrle's departure), he should win Executive of the Year, period - especially considering the injuries. You really need a reality check here.

I will not apologize for ONE SECOND for being in the Jose Valentin/Dan Pasqua fan club

I was one of those who bought into the Crede connection as late as when he hit his ninth homer this year, but he's had such a long homerless drought that I think he'll just never have enough pop to make up for his pathetic average.