Eminor3rd

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:45 PM) But if tickets were $5 apiece, then payroll would probably have to be drastically reduced. Then you might have a hard time selling 3.2 million tickets to watch a s***ty baseball team. I'm not saying it SHOULD be $5 apiece, I'm just saying that the price DOES matter, because in order to sell the place out consistently, you need a whole lot of people to commit at least several hundred dollars to go to a lot of games.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:35 PM) In other words the face value of the tickets aren't the problem. No, quite to the contrary, the point is that you can't expect to sell 3.2 million Sox tickets at the same or similar price point you think a Bears game should be. If tickets were $5 apiece, you'd get way closer to that number. It's got nothing to do with "the economy," and everything to do with supply and demand.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:22 PM) If the argument is price points, then the amount of home games is immaterial. That's not true at all. You pay more for something in higher demand. With unlimited supply, there is no surplus demand to accommodate high prices. Like I said before, how often are people "supposed" to go? The typical football game attender probably goes to one game a year. That's plenty to fill 8 games. How many people do you need to go to one game a year to fill up 81 games? It's actually kind of ridiculous to compare the Bears and the White Sox in this case. Typical White Sox fan probably shows up several times more often than the typical Bears fan, yet former has an attendance problem and the latter never fails to sell out. It's apples to oranges. EDIT: Using iwritecode's capacity numbers above, the Bears have 192,000 seats to sell every year. The White Sox have 3,240,000 seats to sell every year. Everyone in the entire city of Chicago (2,707,120) could go to one Sox game a year and they'd still be ~500,000 short of capacity.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 12:34 PM) I think baseball generally is so unaffordable for the average Joe that it's just not an option anymore. I think there's truth in this. Can you really expect people to pay $25-100 on a ticket plus parking plus food on something that happens 162 times over a 6 months span? I understand football being expensive as there are less than twenty games a year. I always think the media is talking to me when they complain about attendance, but I always attend a handful of games each year. How much are we expected to attend? Am I really the problem or are they only targeting people that go to zero? We talk about prices like they're a one-time expense, but don't we really need a bunch of people going to a lot of games to improve attendance? If you want someone to go to ten games, you're asking for several hundred dollars. Now, if you're taking a family of four, you're talking potentially thousands.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 09:57 AM) They spent 120 days in first place. No one had any idea in April/May/June/July/August and the first two weeks of September that this team would run out of gas during the last two weeks of September. The whole "win and people show up" myth is busted as far as I am concerned. Nah, I think it just applies to the next season. The problem is that they missed the playoffs. If they made a playoff run, I guarantee you'd see some nice attendance next season.

I live in Andersonville, and I only go to 3-5 games each year because of the location. Paying ~$20 for parking makes no sense, but it's a 45-50 minute train ride -- which is fine on the way down, but such an incredibly slow and miserable thing on the way back when it takes 50% longer and is packed like a sardine can until about Belmont. Even if the Cell was on Addison and Clark, though, I'd probably only go to 10 or so games a year. The fact is, I like to pay close attention to every pitch, and that's just better on TV. Going to the game is a cool experience, but as a daily fan, I'm always going to watch ~120 games a year on TV. I'm sorry Jerry, I've chosen to consume your product via television. Good thing you still get bajillions of dollars from your TV contract.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 09:03 AM) Also, if I'm Kenny and I'm thinking about possibly moving Viciedo in a big deal for a right-handed ace, I'm going under the radar and targeting Brandon Morrow. Yeah, Toronto is definitely looking to add pitching. If anything, they'll be the ones dealing a bat to get it.

QUOTE (IowanSoxFan @ Oct 13, 2012 -> 06:03 PM) Just no. Please no. This. There's just no reasonable way this would be worthwhile.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 12, 2012 -> 10:23 AM) I think Ventura could have worked the lineup a little better too, because Adam Dunn really is about the worst imaginable 3rd hitter I can think of. You generally want your 3-hole guy to be a guy who makes good, solid contact with some power and speed, and doesn't strike out an overly large amount. Adam Dunn makes terrible contact, has an assload of power, has virtually no speed, and strikes out at an incredible rate. I've mentioned this several times before, but according to the research Tom Tango did on linear weights and the base/out probability, Adam Dunn is a prototypical 3 hole hitter. http://www.insidethebook.com/c05.shtml I recommend the reading, but the long and short of it is that the #3 hitter hits with bases empty and two outs more than anyone and also hits with 1 out and a runner on first more than anyone. Therefore, high power is the best attribute of a #3 hitter, and high strikeouts are actually desireable because they avoid double plays and don't hurt any more than other outs when they are the last out of an inning. The "traditional" #3 hitter prototype is really what the #2 hitter should be, who gets more RBI-on-a-basehit-or-extra-base-hit opportunities than anyone other than the #4 hitter, and is probably the most wasted lineup spot in "traditional" lineups. I actually LOVE Ventura's lineup construction because Youk/DUnn/Konerko/Rios makes so much sense according to this research. In retrospect, Rios probably should have been the #2 hitter, but #5 is a great place for him too and Youkilis was perfect for it when he was hot. Here's a bastardized summary, not nearly as good as the Book itself: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17...-your-lineup-by

QUOTE (forrestg @ Oct 10, 2012 -> 01:18 PM) Jake is not a #1,2, but perhaps at the low end of a # 3 starter. I think Jake didn't prove enough to me toward the end of the season to give him any more than the 2 year 22m.. We have paid him premium money for no season that he was worth his keep. I would say 22million - the buyout. I like Jake but he did complete the season although not with great success. Did you... did you watch any baseball this year?

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Oct 9, 2012 -> 06:20 PM) The Rays dont need to pay for Shields as they are starting pitching heavy. They have no OF strength at all. My deal includes adding OF quality + a young stud relief pitcher that replaces season-from-God Rodney. Sending AR as a stop-gap for Profar + cash + Floyd for Andrus (whom the world knows is going to be traded) I think makes sense. The Rangers need starting pitching depth desperately. If the Braves don't want to pay McCann because of uncertainty, I think the Sox can afford to as they have a solid regular in Flowers to hold it down. But that's the thing -- Zobrist is better and substantially cheaper than Rios and can play the same position, but also middle infield where they need even more help. The cost savings could be used to sign a reliever of their choice. Rumors are the Rangers are going to try to send Andrus in a deal for Upton, who they need to replace Hamilton. They are aiming way higher with Andrus, and justifiably so. If they move him at all, it means they've deemed Profar ready and don't want a stopgap anyhow, because it would force Kinsler out of position.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Oct 9, 2012 -> 02:29 AM) McCann at 3/36? Yes, McCann at 3/$36M. Though he's worth more, he's broken down multiple times in recent seasons and for a catcher that's big trouble. His current deal has him at a team option for that same $12M. He's seven years younger, is a better offensive player and would be a huge defensive upgrade over AJ. Rays are gonna take on salary to get rid of Zobrist? The Rays are not destitute any longer. They have new TV deal money coming to them. The Rays have no hitting. As nice a player as Zobrist is he's wasted in that lineup. He's a glorified role player. The Rays would be acquiring one of the top OFs in MLB last season that would upgrade their lineup in a dynamic way hitting in front of Longoria. They would also obtain a young, cost controlled reliever that picked up 29 saves as a rookie. Those guys are not easy to find. Both impact players for Ben Zobrist. Rangers are going to move Andrus... for RAMIREZ?! Profar projects to be a better SS for Texas and The Rangers are very much rumored to be moving Andrus this offseason. There are other reasons why an Andrus deal could make sense this off-season. First, there are the rules laid out by the new MLB collective bargaining agreement that make it likely the Rangers would get much more for Andrus in 2013 than 2014 -- teams who trade for a player in the final year of his contract are no longer entitled to collect draft compensation if he leaves via free agency. Ramirez is a more impactful offensive player with comparable defensive skills. Alexei averages a .276 / 17HR / 77RBI / .725 OPS slash over 162 for his career Andrus averages a .275 / 4HR / 53RBI / .695 OPS slash over 162 for his career Alexei + Gavin Floyd for a defense first SS that steals a decent amount of bases. If this is all so unrealistic you haven't read this entire thread. Elvis Andrus (2011): 4.4 WAR, 94 wRC+ Elvis Andrus (2012): 4.2 WAR, 95 wRC+ Alexei Ramirez (2011): 4.8 WAR, 94 wRC+ Alexei Ramirez (2012): 1.8 WAR, 77 wRC+ The only way you can paint them as similar players is by ignoring their ages and trends -- all of those offensive numbers you cited are bolstered by Alexei's 2008 rookie season. Andrus is 7 years younger and has upside, Alexei is clearly declining. Profar is considereda very good defensive SS. If they move Andrus, it's to make room for Profar, not to get an older, worse player back whose long-term, market-rate contract blocks Profar longer than Andrus does. How is Zobrist a glorified role player? He's averaged 6 WAR per season over the last two. Rios just had a career resurgence and was only worth 4.3 WAR. The Rays don't even want to pay for James Shields' $9m option next year, why would they want three years of Rios at $12.5m? Why wouldn't they rather have Zobrist and his $5.5m and $7m dollar options, when he's a better defensive right fielder than Rios and can also fill in at 2B/SS? Rios (2012): .364 wOBA, 127 wRC+ Zobrist (2012): .362 wOBA, 135 wRC+ McCann's price may be driven down by his shoulder, but if the outcome of his shoulder is such that the Braves aren't even willing to give him 3/36, then we probably don't want him either.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Oct 8, 2012 -> 08:17 PM) My 2012 plan: This team needs better baseball IQ, fundamentals and higher .OBP. This is a roster shakeup that is entirely possible. Key subtractions: Rios (trade) AJ (walk) Floyd (trade) Alexei (trade) Peavy (walk) Reed (trade) Youkilis (walk) Key additions: Sign Brian McCann 3/$36 Sign Eric Chavez 1/$1.5M Trade Rios & Reed to T.B. for Ben Zobrist & Wade Davis (Sell high on Rios and Reed. TB lost Upton. Needs OF. Davis replaces Floyd in rotation) Trade Ramirez , cash & Floyd to Texas for Elvis Andrus (Andrus blocking Profar and free agent in 2015. Allows another year or two of development for Profar. Texas desperately needs pitching. Floyd is decent get in this deal) Sign Austin Kearns 1/$1M Sign Carlos Villanueva 2/$5M Re-sign Brett Meyers to close/start (4th starter) Rotation: Sale Danks Davis Quintana Villanueva Lineup: DeAza (CF) Andrus (SS) Zobrist (RF) Konerko (1B) McCann © Dunn (DH) Viciedo (LF) Chavez (3B) Beckham (2B) Zobrist can play 3B along with Chavez (part time). Kearns plays RF. This is maybe the least realistic plan I've ever seen. McCann at 3/36? Rays are gonna take on salary to get rid of Zobrist? Rangers are going to move Andrus... for RAMIREZ?!

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Oct 8, 2012 -> 02:23 PM) Are there any good RH hitting catchers hitting the market that can be brought in to split time with Tyler? Lucroy or Maldonado from the Brew crew are targets if they wanna make a trade. I don't think Lucroy is going anywhere.

I like the idea of trading Rios and signing Victorino as a reclamation project.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 01:09 PM) How the hell can Jake as the article stated "be one of the most sought after" free agents this winter? Bye bye Jake. I do hope he goes to the NL so we don't have to face him, although I could picture Dunn hitting some bombs off Jake who throws a good number of meatballs up there per game. He's a good pitcher, but by no means dominant. And the fact he demands to stay in the game gives you some extra hacks against him in the later innings when he's done. Because he pitched really well for over 200 innings and there are only so many guys hitting the market. Sometimes I feel like this board doesn'[t understand context. You can't judge that statement without considering what is available in free agency. There's Greinke, Haren, Peavy, and E. Santana, and Peavy had a better season than all of them, except maybe Greinke.

There's been no indication at all that the Mets want to move Wright. They've been talking about extending him.

QUOTE (mataipaepae @ Oct 3, 2012 -> 10:59 PM) Did he show that maybe he could be the left handed DH next year? Making dunn trade able? No.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 3, 2012 -> 12:32 PM) Why suggest pipe dreams? Let's also trade for Mike Trout while we're at it. Stay realistic. Grienke hates pitching in the Cell and we can't afford him. /idea Then close the thread and start one called, "what I think the Sox do will despite what I think is best."

That may be correct, but it doesn't sound like the best way to do it. The thread was about YOUR plan, not a prediction. I get what you mean about trades, but you aren't naming any targets, so my original point still stands regarding the players available. Who are you targeting at those positions? What are you paying? Headley's value is premium and we won't be able to get him.

I don't understand the tweener mentality -- it seems like most of you want to see the Sox go into 2013 with a marginally worse team. If you think it's a lost cause, fine, but then why not blow it up? I say shore it up or tear it down.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 2, 2012 -> 06:46 PM) You have to be kidding me. I guess we don't have holes at: 3B C UTIL RP SP (depending on options) He fills in 1 hole, for the amount of money we probably have to fill all 5. You can't magically create players in those positions. Who would you sign? Youkilis is the only thing resembling a decent 3B available in FA. AJ is the best FA C. You're joking if you think we should spend money on a UTIL or RP instead of a frontline starter.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Sep 28, 2012 -> 09:16 AM) I like most of your post but, 13 million for a .354 OBP? No thank you. There are many ways to get a .354 OBP and they don't cost 13 mil. Where?

Who cares?

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 2, 2012 -> 03:13 PM) This team can't afford Grienke, he's a huge risk and would be very pricey. It'd be smarter to invest that money elsewhere. On what?