Thad Bosley

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 11:18 PM) How does compare to otger teams in the league? How many games have other teams won? How many teams have a world series win or as many playoff victories? This ownership group has outperformed many and definitely out performed any other in Chicago. Fair questions, and I'll see to compile the exact records for you. But as a teaser of sorts, let me say that the small market Minnesota Twins have twice as many World Series appearances and World Series championships as our Sox since the Sox' current ownership group took over 34 years ago, and the small market Kansas City Royals also have twice as many WS appearances during that time period, and just as many WS trophies as the Sox. Small market Oakland has been to the WS three times in this same time since '81, with one WS championship to show for it. We are, however, tied with the Marlins and Diamondbacks, the two 90s expansion teams, with WS appearances and championships, so we have that going for us. The Tigers and Rangers, although without any WS trophies, have made it to the Series more often than the Sox have over the last 34 years. I could go on, but I think you get the point: we have NOT outperformed "many", not even by a long shot.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 07:51 PM) That list was probably relevant in 2004. But 2005 happened. 3 million people showed up in 2006. All of those thoughts about the Sox fan base being so small, and non-existent were mythbusted. If those same fans, who showed up in 2005/6, went back to not going to games, and are claiming any amount of reasons related stuff that happened in the 80's, they are not really fans. They are just miserable people looking for excuses. 2005 proved that the White Sox have a huge bandwagon component to their fan base. All the last eight years has done is reinforce it. Pre-2005 I didn't buy it at all, but now, the facts are there. All the last eight years has done is reinforce what we saw in the first 26 years of this ownership group: making it to the playoffs just once every eight years or so and coming away from those rare appearances with practically nothing to show for it is going to result in dwindling attendance. It's that simple, and should be expected. It's not because Sox fans are "miserable people" (not a nice thing to say, btw). There should be no expectation of unconditional love here, that the 2.9 million plus who walked through the turnstiles in '06 should have done so in 2011 and 2013, or else be dismissed as "bandwagon". They are consumers, and unfortunately when Sox product isn't up to snuff, they choose not to consume as much of it. Only one year in the 34 this ownership group has been running things worthy of mention. Just one! Only four playoff appearances in the other 33 years, with just four wins across all four of those appearances. THAT record is what is MISERABLE, not the fans.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 07:23 PM) BS 2005 happened. 3 million people showed up in 2006. Did 1.3 million of them go back to being mad about 1980? Please. If Sox fans are really still pissed about Harry Carey, the New Comiskey Park, White Flag, or any of that other BS, they really are the worst fans in baseball. You didn't highlight the important part of my last quote. I said the laundry list I referred to "CONTRIBUTED to the alienation of the fan base". I don't think I could be any clearer that the primary reason for the fan base malaise is the lack of winning. But if you want to discount the cumulative effect of years and years of the poor management decisions made by this ownership group, you go right ahead. But I will steadfastly maintain the reason this large market team's attendance and tv ratings are in the toilet as we speak is a combination of all of these things, primary of which is the lack of winning.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 06:56 PM) All we need is a White Flag mention now. It's not on par with the Harry Caray/Sportsvision/flawed Comiskey Park design debacles, but it's part of a long laundry list of things that have happened over the past 34 years which have contributed to the alienation of the fans.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 06:51 PM) Spin it like you want to. If fans don't go to games, they don't get to complain about the payroll. I'm not spinning anything, just looking at reality. The results of recent years, the results of the collective 34 years of this ownership group, do not translate to having a big and fervent season ticket base. It's that simple. Look at the spike in attendance after we won in '05. There was a waiting list for season tickets, for crying out loud. Had the team been able to maintain that momentum and go on any kind of a run for a few years after that, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But they didn't, mediocrity (at best) returned, and the interest of the fans dwindled correspondingly. Now you, you can choose to spin the problem by blaming the fans. I think that blame is misplaced. I blame it on the provider of the product and their consistent inability to field a team that the fans can get excited about.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 06:42 PM) Then please explain to me why the Cubs draw well. They've had an even worse situation and yet they've never had any problem drawing fans. That's an easy one. "Their" stewardship, while no great shakes, did manage to brilliantly maximize the talents of Harry Caray back in the '80s, along with providing them maximum exposure on free TV, which cultivated an entire generation of fans drawn to Caray and that little ballpark that he sold to the fans on a daily basis. So powerful was his draw and the way he sold the Wrigley experience that the effects remain to this very day. Our ownership group? After year one, they both got rid of Caray and took the Sox off free tv, and in my opinion, this organization has never really fully recovered from that. They've had their chances to recover either through fielding a winning team consistently, which they haven't, or by building a stadium with an experience that fans wouldn't want to miss. They blew that chance, big time, with the design of the new Comiskey Park. And while the renovations have been quite nice, in and of themselves they haven't been able to wake up the base. But it's this lack of winning that is the root cause of most of the attendance issues.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 06:34 PM) We also have a pitiful fan base, so it fits. A fan base that merely reflects the results of an ownership group who, in 34 years of their stewardship now, have all of one World Series appearance to brag about, with just four other rather non-memorable trips to the postseason. Four wins in those four trips, btw. Is it surprising to you then that we have neither a bigger fan base nor an energized one with the one we've got?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 06:00 PM) Merkin is a pretty annoying fan so I get it. I also do not think he is correct at the payroll number. I think they have more room than that, probably at least 10 million more. One would think the payroll would be higher than $90M, if Kenny was serious about us looking at whatever this new roster turns out to be and us walking away "dreaming again" about postseason play. $90M is far less than the average MLB payroll has been for a few years, so I don't know how that number and "dreaming again" square up.

QUOTE (bear_brian @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 12:38 PM) There is no way, IMO, that the Dodgers are going to trade Pederson or Seager without getting some salary relief in the form of one of the high-priced veteran outfielders, probably Ethier. So, if there is a "package", it would possibly be Etheir and Pederson or Seager. We don't need two of the Dodgers' outfielders, or else we'd essentially be trading for their logjam in the outfield.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 09:42 PM) Melky, Rasmus and Saunders. I'm also adding Brock Holt to the list (See my post in Red Sox OF's thread for more in depth on him) I don't think it'll be any of those guys, quite frankly. Mr. Kenny Williams is on record right now stating that when our roster is finally completed, Sox fans will be able to "dream again" about returning to the postseason. With the two, maybe three, remaining big holes to fill in LF, RH starter, and maybe 3B, I don't think adding any of those four outfielders really moves the needle to get us dreaming about anything. Whoever they get for that corner outfield spot is going to be a bigger name than any of those four guys you mentioned. I mean, think of it: you add one of those four guys to play left, then you sign one of the second tier RH starter free agents. Would that get you dreaming about anything, other than maybe a triumphant return to having a .500 ball club? It just doesn't add up. I don't know how they're going to pull it off, but I think they have a splashy move coming our way, maybe even two, that will genuinely have us all excited about our chances both in 2015 and beyond. But again, I don't think it involves the likes of Rasmus, Saunders, or certainly Holt. Maybe, just maybe, Cabrera, but even he, I don't think it's going to be him, either.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:00 AM) Would someone please provide a list of the good Left Handed starters in our Division? Without compiling such a list, my impression is that most of the good southpaws are on the Sox. Therefore, I still think we could use one more middle of the order type left handed bat. Ethier is still my favorite candidate, as he absolutely rakes vs RHP. I'd love to see him sit on days that a southpaw is starting for the other team, and have him available to pinch hit against a tough RH reliever, in the late innings. At any rate, if someone can provide that information, I'd be grateful. While you're at it, if you can list how many good LH relief pitchers there are, that would be interesting as well. Off hand, I would guess that the number of both LH starters and relievers, is very small. Do you really want Ethier now, after we just added a left handed hitter who rakes against RH pitching but who can't hit lefties?

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 10:35 PM) This I agree with. I'll go crazy and say the Sox trade for Kemp. Kenny always gets his guy. I think it's going to be Kemp as well. He is an elite bat that would look superb in the number five slot in the lineup. And although he still has five years left to go on his contract, that only takes him to the end of his age 34 year. We are already heavily linked to acquiring one of the Dodger's outfielders, and acquiring Kemp would help make sense of the LaRoche signing. With Kemp's so-so defense these days, he makes perfect sense then as the DH against left handed pitching the next two years while LaRoche is still around, and then maybe he takes on that role full time for the last three years of his contract.

To me, this move signals an even stronger possibility that one Mr. Matt Kemp will be the outfielder we eventually get from the Dodgers. Kemp isn't so great defensively himself these days, so with us he would become the DH against LH starters, with a soon-to-be-named RH 4th outfielder starting in LF on those days. Then, in two years, Kemp slides over as the full time DH. Meanwhile, the middle of the order for the next couple of years would feature Abreu, LaRoche, Kemp and Garcia. Not too terribly shabby!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 07:04 PM) It isn't a dated view until they do something to prove it wrong. The Sox always, and I mean always, go into a season not expecting to lose money. I was just kidding about the dated view part, and won't believe it 'til I see a change as well. But I wasn't kidding about noticing the change in attitude and the way they seem to be talking about things right now. And how nice is it to not be talking about not being able to spend a dollar when you only have 50 cents, or how Kenny Williams is scrambling to find loose change in between couch cushions. Good heavens, that line of speak gets old real fast. But so far this offseason it seems somewhat refreshingly different, and I'm expecting some big and exciting news before it's all over and done with.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 01:06 PM) The White Sox will not knowingly commit to losing money, that's why. That is such a dated view of the White Sox spending policy! Why, just yesterday, Rick Hahn was quoted as saying "We aren't going to be precluded from any single player because of running up against the limits of our payroll." He went on to describe that while chasing certain high-priced players in the past was not realistic, it isn't necessarily going to be the case this year. In fact, what I find particularly refreshing is that also unlike in years past, with all of that talk we used to hear about the Sox "flying under the radar" and what not, this year Hahn is openly welcoming and seemingly enjoying the Sox being associated with rumors about their interest in some big ticket items. I don't know exactly what's going on this offseason, but it feels different, and in an exciting sort of way, and I like it. While the team won't go too overboard crazy in spending, I also don't get the feeling they're going to be wed to some smallish total payroll number like $90M.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this news came out earlier this year: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/201...-chicago-sports

I don't believe the games will be broadcast on "WGN-A", as in WGN-America, but rather WGN-TV, local channel 9 in the Chicagoland area.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 10:56 AM) It doesn't matter if the Cubs win 100 games or lose 100 games. Time has shown us that there is only way for the Sox to become relevant in Chicago. Win playoff series. That's it. This town has enough casual fans to support both teams, the Sox just don't have the allure the Cubs do when they aren't in the playoffs. I don't disagree with you at all. In some ways that's the point I was trying to make - start winning in order to avoid becoming irrelevant. I have very vivid memories of the mid to late 80s when the Cubs were super popular (even though they weren't winning, they were still very popular vis-a-vis Harry Caray) and the Sox were not winning and how completely irrelevant the team seemed back then. It wasn't a particularly pleasant period to be a Sox fan, and I would really like to avoid going back to that type of environment, if at all possible.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2014 -> 09:58 AM) If the White Sox ever do put together a run of domination, the next excuse, whatever it will be, will be entertaining. Speaking of a "run of domination" (one which, btw, has never occurred during the 34 year tenure of the Reinsdorf ownership group), the Sox ought to really start thinking of doing what it takes to go on one, and sooner rather than later. With the Chicago National League Ballclub starting to awaken from it's slumber, what with the signing of Maddon as manager, the $525M in renovations happening to their ballpark this winter, the coming-of-age of a whole slew of blue chip prospects, and the talks of being big spenders in free agency, they could realistically be on the verge of becoming a real powerhouse in baseball. And if and when that happens, it will be near impossible for the White Sox to win over any "casual" baseball fan in the city, what with the kind of press coverage we all know the Cubs will inevitably get if they do become good/very good again. That's not good for an organization that is already at the bottom of the barrel in terms of overall fan interest, as indicated in it's abysmal attendance and TV ratings. With that said, I truly do believe this to be as crucial an offseason as any in recent memory for Mr. Hahn & Co. in terms of doing what it takes to get out in front of what really looks to be a force to be reckoned with soon on the north side of town.

You actually have to wonder about accountability over there at 35th and Shields. TV ratings and attendance are in the toilet (28th in MLB in both categories) and no playoff appearance in 6 years now. As far as key performance indicators go, those statistics tell a whole lot about how lousy this organization has been at running its business in recent years. And yet instead of hearing about people losing their jobs and/or shake-ups in management due to these absysmal results, we only hear stories about how loyal the Chairman is to his employees. Again, the root cause of the team's problems, to me, are management/ownership related, not about a bandwagon fan base. http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/201...est-since-1999#

Cuban Patience - the key to success!!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 29, 2014 -> 10:44 AM) I think he is signed through next season. Are you sure about that? My recollection is he signed a six year deal after the '08 season. That would take him through to the end of this season. I could be wrong, but I thought it was a six year contract starting in '09. Maybe he subsequently added another year, I don't know.

If I'm not mistaken, Steve Stone's contract is up at the end of this year. He almost walked away a couple of years ago. I wonder what the plans are for him to re-up and continue on. I certainly hope he does!

Well, based on this appearance, he ought to be in the running for a spot in the pen next year. Maybe the 8th inning set-up guy?

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jul 9, 2014 -> 03:41 PM) Have them go out together and leading the parade into the 10th anniversary next year. See no harm in that. I don't think that's a bad idea at all. Just depends on whether Paulie and/or management would want Paulie to have to share the stage with AJ. But you are right - it would be a good lead into the 10th anniversary!!