Eminor3rd

I got a little elaboration out of him during his chat today, regarding Gordita Chrunchela:

QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 11:42 AM) Personally, I hope they do trade Alexei because it means they like the value coming back. The legitimate window for sustained good teams is 2016-2019. All of their moves should be with this in mind. If trading Alexei is a part of that overall picture, then go for it. This is my feeling, too. If they don't feel Semien is a SS, I'd be totally fine seeing if Sanchez can stick in 2015. If he fails, I'm totally okay giving Leury a long look. I don't think he has the bat to be an impact player, but his defense should be more than enough to hold down the fort until Anderson comes along, IMO. If it turns out Anderson can't stick in a couple years, well then Alexei will be 36 and we'll be looking outside the org for a solution anyway.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 11:06 AM) Random question: How is Ravelo's first name pronounced? Is it Rangel like Angel or Ranger? Or pronounced like "Ron-Hell"? QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 11:08 AM) Ron-Hell And Micker is Mike-er. QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 02:11 PM) Dude I'm just gonna wait for whatever Bill Melton says QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Wrangler Unravel QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 02:15 PM) Wrango Navel. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 03:47 PM) Rondo Ranchero QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 04:26 PM) Rear LovAngel. Uh, oh. QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 04:53 PM) GORDITA CRUNCHELA I HEAR HES A TASTY YOUNG PROSPECT Lol, I'm glad we let this run to its proper conclusion. If Ravelo ever makes it, I believe his official SoxTalk nickname should be "Gordita Crunchella."

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 01:48 AM) Here's the link to what I was talking about with video. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/investigati...14/#more-158004 I missed this article when it was published, and I'm really glad you brought it up. This is the kind of thing that makes you wish WE could have been the ones that snatched Francisco Cervelli away from the Yankees. It's really ncie to have a bat at that position, but we've got to take care of the defense/receiving first.

So he's lower than most of us on Ravelo and Micah, and VERY low on Bassitt. Numbered summary: 1. Rodon 2. Anderson 3. Montas 4. Adams 5. Danish BREAK 6. Michaelczewski 7. Johnson 8. Hawkins 9. Adolfo 10. Thompson 11. Davidson 12. May BREAK 13. Sanchez 14. Sanburn 15. Beck 16. Barnum 17. Ravelo 18. Snodgress 19. Fry 20. Saladino 21. Engel 22. Trexler Notable Mentions: Basto, Wilkins, Rondon, Austin, Bassitt, Nieto

I've been salivating for this day.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 08:12 PM) Up until recently, the given formula is sports marketing was 80% season ticket holders, 20% walk-up. In April/May/September, it's probably closer to 90-95% STH. As far as the group/one-off outings go, that's true...but I also think some of the bloom is definitely off that type of "Groupon" marketing. Season ticket holders provide EIGHTY percent of the revenue? How?

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 06:37 PM) Yeah seeing as though they have had success in the MLB, I would agree it would probably Syndergaard Which, if he's healthy, would be a really nice grab.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 06:18 PM) The bolded is actually an argument that Season Ticket sales are in fact really important because season ticket sales for the next year are gotten by bundling them with playoff tickets. I'm not saying they aren't important, but they are nowhere near a big enough piece of the pie to factor into a FA decision. And again, less than half of them are really considering not renewing anyhow.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 06:32 PM) I think they end up budging and we get either Syndergaard, Wheeler or Harvey straight up. Mets have a lot of depth with the three vets in Gee, Niese, Colon, then 2 of the 3 depending on who is traded, de Grom and Montero and a few other guys in the top 10 I would say that, at most, we could get them to budge on Syndergaard straight up, since he is coming off a down year. I cannot imagine any scenario where we end up getting Harvey, and Wheeler would be a clear overpay IMO.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 06:11 PM) http://wtaq.com/blogs/sports/983/the-minne...rting-rotation/ Contingent upon the Twins spending money again (like they did with Hughes, Correia and Nolasco) on a couple of veteran 3-4 guys. Haha, if you're trying to project a rotation, and one of the slots is "?????????", it's probably not a strong argument against the strength of said rotation.

I would hate it enough to quit my job and dedicate myself, for years if necessary, to becoming a night-time janitor at the White Sox executive offices so that I could take a s*** on Rick Hahn's desk.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 02:00 PM) When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea. And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking. I just don't agree with this. I think that it is an argument made by marketing and echoed by media, but I don't think actually affects ticket sales in a significant way, at least not in Chicago. Firstly, season tickets make up a much smaller portion of total attendance than people assume. It's significant, but the industry is moving toward groups. Secondly, while all STH will be very vocal about the team's direction, the majority of them are going to renew regardless. They'll grumble, but they'll be there. You will lose some that are on the fence, but it ends up being a much smaller piece than it seems. The largest portion of the crowd on any given night is walk-ups, and they are, by far, the most sensitive to wins and losses. You can look at our attendance figures the past decade and see this pattern in play. Most recently, even the IN season record hasn't affected things much. The years when you see attendance increasing are the years AFTER a successful, winning season. So the overall point is that, IMO, the Sox should not be thinking about their acquisitions in terms of sending a signal to fans; they should just be trying to build a winner as efficiently as possible. The faster they can do that, the faster they'll be in the black. That doesn't mean Hahn shouldn't pay lip service to the media about "being aggressive," but at the end of the line, the numbers are going to follow the win column, even if they show up a year late. The best thing he can do for the team, financially, is build a team that contends for several consecutive years.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 12:27 PM) If you used that formula, you really wouldn't sign any free agents. The Sox signed Jose Abreu and attendance went down. You like Russell Martin. If he gets $15 million a year, using your formula, for him to be "worth" the contract, he is going to have to attract 5k more each game. That isn't happening. They just need to sign guys that will help them win consistently for a decent period of time. No one player is going to increase attendance, and I don't think anyone here would be naive enough to suggest it. Maybe some winning will. We all know, losing will not. Personally, I don't think it makes sense the Sox would be in the Scherzer bidding. The years and money and his agent all suggest otherwise, and until at least one of those is shown to not be the case anymore, I can't believe they are even interested in negotiating. I agree with you. Most of why I was posting was to illustrate that the "sign big guy and it will pay for itself in ticket sales" is a bad formula. I'm just trying to say that a guy like Scherzer is never going to "pay for himself" in terms of increased interest. But winning will, which means you can't look at this in a linear fashion. I know I was clear as mud on that, and I apologize.

Wish he would have ended up out of our division, but I agree that 4/68 is going to hurt them eventually, so that's a silver lining.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 10:23 AM) Wow, if you think the value of a ticket sold is equal to its selling price then I don't know what to say. For each ticket sold, factor in parking, factor in food & beverage, factor in merchandise & souvenirs. Those factors are probably equal to the price of admission on average. And a 50% OP rate on these incremental ticket sales? You realize how much fixed costs there are at a baseball stadium right? Maybe you need a little more security and vendors, but it will be very insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The additional sales would be almost all profit. And most importantly, your Scherzer example ignores our other payroll commitments and what our projected revenues will be without him. Saying "here's last year's ticket sales, adding $25M would require x" is ridiculous. We have $50M or so in payroll commitments at the moment. We could add Scherzer right now and come in below last year's payroll number. So what exactly are you adding Scherzer on top of? What can we afford without him? I never once said if we had a $100M payroll that we could add Scherzer and the deal would pay for itself. That's stupid. All I said was if you can convince the fans you're serious about next year, they will buy more tickets and you should be able to afford a higher payroll. You can argue how much of an impact it would have, but the concept itself is factual. "Energize the fanbase" as you mockingly said and you will sell more tickets. That's what "per cap" means. The sox aren't going to sign Scherzer. It would be a bad business decision. If you think that "showing the fans you're serious" will drive attendance, you haven't been paying attention to the white sox and attendance over the past ten years. Attendance will increase when there is a winner, and not before. If you think adding Scherzer to a 74 win team will do that, then we disagree on a different level altogether.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 08:25 AM) If the front office can convince Sox fans they're serious about being competitive next year, Sox fans will buy more tickets and the incremental revenue will offset payroll the increase. That will be their basis for increasing payroll and there will be no expected loss. Ok so, I don't know what Max Scherzer's contract is going to be, but let's assume, conservatively, that it'll cost $25m next year. I'm not even sure what the average ticket price for a Sox game is, but let's assume that it's $20. Reasonable? Per cap. Let's say $10. Might be a little low but people forget that labor cost increases with attendance, so margin is a bit lower too. $10 after adjustments for the sake of easy math. So for the Sox to break even on Max Scherzer's salary next year, from a revenue standpoint, by "energizing the fan base," then Max Scherzer would have to generate 833,333 additional tickets completely by himself. The Sox TOTAL attendance last year was 1.6 million. You can adjust my guesses however you like, but the number at the end is still unrealistic.

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Nov 8, 2014 -> 05:11 PM) I think people are way overrating Heyward. Earlier in the year Atlanta was not very happy with him. He hit 11 HR's and had an OPS of .735. He plays stellar defense but guys with those numbers are not going to cost "the farm". He's a good player but he's no superstar or untouchable by any means. He's a career .262 hitter and has had 1 year with more than 20 HR's. He's definitely attainable. Age 26, elite defender, more than a standard deviation above average at the plate.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 08:38 PM) Ugh

QUOTE (Lillian @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 05:01 PM) Here is a surprising statistic, which might change one's perspective: Quality starts in 2014: Max Scherzer 21 out of 33 starts. John Danks 20 out of 32 starts. That was using the old formula, which is 6 or more innings, 3 earned runs, or less. And we are considering giving Scherzer $25 Million for 6 years, while we are all desperate to unload Danks, and his contract. Very interesting!! Lol

This contract never works out.

Troy Tulowitzki. I think about dream scenarios where there's a three way deal where we send Alexei to NYY or something, and end up with Tulo. Or maybe we send Alexei and prospects to COL. There are a million reasons it's a bad idea, but I'm obsessed with that dude and this is the only time he's ever been available, so I want him.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-2015-fr...gent-landmines/

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 10:39 PM) OK. lol

Yeah, this would be great. Why would the Angels ever do that?