Lip Man 1

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jul 13, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) Scar tissue built up around the nerve after TJ surgery. It needed to be cleaned up. I think gloom and doom on Nate is premature Until he can actually make it through a season healthy, I think it is premature to count on him for anything in my opinion.

Look at all the Sox relief pitchers hurt the past few years...Jones, Putnam, Petricka...even Zach Duke. Think back to how Ventura managed the pen sometimes using three or four guys to get through one inning because he was so wedded to the "lefty has to face lefty" philosophy. All those appearances added up it seems...not just throwing in the game but warming up to get into the game. Now the chickens have come home to roost.

I still feel 2020 is the target date.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Jul 13, 2017 -> 11:31 AM) What is Carlos Rodon's future with the White Sox? How long is he under contract for - when does he become a free agent? Scott Boras is his agent (to my recollection). If accurate, there is a very good chance that he want to test the free agent market and the Sox will be left holding the bag. If the White Sox are 2 years away (maybe even 3) from realistically competing in the majors, even with all of the young talent they are compiling, is Rodon a potential trading chip they could use now (or in the off-season) to add another 2 top prospects? He hasn't been a dominating pitcher, but the upside is there, and a team would get him under contract, etc. for the next few years. Will his name come up in rumors over the next few weeks or Winter or do you expect the White Sox to use Rodon as a potential top of the rotation starter for the next White Sox team that is competitive? I think the Sox still have him for another three years. Boras is still his agent. Given his history Boras is going to take Rodon to free agency and he'll probably be asking for more than the Sox can or will want to pay him (unless new ownership is in place by then...) Sox probably won't be contending until 2020 so my guess is he gets traded with a year or a year and a half before he can go free agency.

Guy can't stay healthy. The contract clause is interesting though and well done by Hahn.

Will miss Q. Class guy and an excellent pitcher...wish him all the best. On paper it sounds like the Sox got some top people, can't complain. This should also put to rest though thinking the "rebuild" was just an excuse to get rid of Sale and Eaton only.

First game I ever attended saw Gary Peters throw a complete game, 1-hitter against Baltimore. July 15, 1963: http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1963/B07150CHA1963.htm Pretty hard to top that! This is a good question. Off the top of my head without looking things up I've seen Peters, Bradley, Wood, Bahnsen, Lemonds, Stone, Barrios, Kravec, Perez, Buehrle, Garland, Garcia, Contreras.

Doesn't look good: http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/241...ooked-at-again/

I hope it's "minor" too (of course the Sox have made that claim a number of times this year to the guys on the big league roster....that hasn't turned out to be very accurate has it?)

QUOTE (The Mighty Mite @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 01:57 PM) Three times we came close to losing the team, one of these years it's going to happen. Very, VERY seriously doubt it. Eventually new ownership will take over...that changes everything in my opinion.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 01:51 PM) It's never going to be easy for the Sox to draw when you are competing against the Cubs and Wrigley Field. If/when the team gets more competitive I think the Sox could regularly draw in the upper 20's or even 30,000 per game. A rebuilding club just is not going to draw very well. I agree with this although it should be noted that in the 17 years between 51 and 67, the Sox outdrew the Cubs in 16 of those seasons...sometimes by a wide margin.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 04:28 PM) Eh they're just not good. Does lately include the 2 recent walk offs ? They're playing the same way they have all year. Bad starting pitching and always playiing catch up is difficult. Yep...hard to do anything if your starters can't even consistently go five innings.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 01:44 PM) The thing about 2005, the White Sox were never not in first place. First place from day one until the end of the season and 11-1 in the playoffs. About as dominating as can be. Yet in September, they didn't even draw 50k today for a 3 day series vs. KC. Even though they led wire to wire the memory of 2001-2002-2003 (and the choke in late September) and to a certain extent the fade in the second half of 2004 (due to injuries) were still fresh in fan's minds. "How are they going to blow it this time?" was always there.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 01:26 PM) Do you think of the the 1960's White Sox when you think about successful teams? I mean sure they made their first WS appearance in 40 years and then followed it up a few 2 place finishes but nothing to really brag about... It was similair to 2005. One oddly lucky year in the middle of a lot of bad ones. Historically this comment is wrong. The Sox had 17 consecutive winning seasons including 1960-1967. That's the 4th longest streak in MLB history. From 51`-67 they won 90 or more games seven times and from 51-60 you only played 154 games. They went to the series in 59 and won 90+ in 63-64-65. That's a successful franchise. What absolutely hurt the Sox in the 1960's was the social unrest, the perception that Comiskey Park became a "dangerous place" because of where it was located and the ethnic groups around it including people of color. The Sox couldn't do a damn thing about that. Ergo the "moving" rumors which began in 1968 (co incidentally when the Sox were about to have the three worst consecutive seasons in franchise history...)

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 12:49 PM) We just need to stop comparing ourselves to the Cubs who are the biggest attendance anomaly in baseball and compare ourselves to what "normal" teams do when they don't play well. Just look at the teams in our own division. The Royals had attendance around 1.3 to 1.5 million every year for years. Then they went to the WS and *only* drew 1.9 million. Then 2.7 million the next year when they won. Last year they missed the playoffs and their attendance went down. I'm sure it will go down even more if they miss the playoffs again this year. The Indians, even with a WS appearance last year haven't cracked 2 million since 2008. The Twins attendance has been steadily declining since they moved into their new stadium. They've been to the playoffs once since then. We need to quit acting like the White Sox attendance isn't completely normal for what this team is and has been for several years. Again terrific post. Very well done!

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) The problem is that 2005 pretty much came out of nowhere. The fans came out about as well as you can expect for a team that was predicted to finish 3rd or 4th in the division and hadn't shown a lot of promise in the years past. Then in 2006 we came out in droves ready to support the team as much as we could. But they fell short and then 2007 happened and we all figured it was back to the same ole, same old once again. Sure we got teased a little in 2008 but I don't think anyone really believed that team would do much. And we've gotten nothing since then. I'm positive the Sox would support a consistant winner/contender. We just haven't been given the chance yet. Absolutely agree with this comment 100%

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 4, 2017 -> 05:52 PM) Tatis has all the makings of a super prospect in two years if he continues with the development he's showing I was specifically referring to Johnson in my comment responding to a poster who brought his name up.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 5, 2017 -> 08:55 AM) Both will be gone by August 1st. Agree. Take whatever you can get for them. They aren't re-signing so anything is better than nothing.

Tough call. Track record hasn't been good. Is this a fluke? Since the Sox aren't going to be contending in my opinion for another two years if someone makes a reasonable offer you move him.

In the end this game came down to Shields being Shields.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 4, 2017 -> 10:57 AM) However, it is significant money. The Cubs on average draw about 18k more than the White Sox. Almost 1.5 million over the course of a season. Even if you conservatively put that at $50 a head, it's an additional $75 million, which, if you think the Sox are broken, and from your posts I think that would be a safe assumption, it definitely would help fix it. Considering the discrepancy in ticket prices, the Cubs probably will pull in close to $100 million more than the White Sox this year through ticket sales. It's is still important, not only for now, but the future. Once people stop going to games and find alternative things to do with their time and other ways to spend their entertainment funds, it can take a long time to get them back. The White Sox are wise to keep their prices low for now. It will be interesting to see how much success they will need to pull the plug on things like family Sunday. I think the Sox have been broken for a decade but they are taking proactive steps to try to solve matters. Given the limitations both self imposed and outside of their control this was the wisest course of action they could take. My point though is in reply to the original poster that the Sox will not go bankrupt tomorrow if they "only" draw 1.5 million. Because of the massive and different revenue streams for MLB they are fine financially. Now throw in what is arguably the best stadium deal in all of MLB and the last thing any fan has to worry about is their financial solvency. When (if) they start winning again attendance will be fine. History shows with this franchise you have to win for fans to come out. It takes time but eventually they do. Now if you want to KEEP fans coming out you have to win consistently, which the Sox with rare exceptions (1951-1967, 1981-1983, 2000-2006) have not done.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 4, 2017 -> 12:02 PM) This is appalling. The White Sox have acquired some really awful baseball players and yet everybody keeps their jobs. Somebody thought Shields could pitch and the Sox had to take over a lot of money on his contract. Very bizarre. He had given up 10 runs the start before the Sox got him and was called out by SD for his ineptitude. And we throw a good prospect in the Erik Johnson for Shields deal. Weird. I believe Eric Johnson got hurt and has shown very little. Haven't followed him so I could be wrong but if I am not, it's not like the Sox gave up some top of the line prospect.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 3, 2017 -> 11:24 AM) To say it doesn't matter much is not paying attention. It isn't the end all it once was, but just taking ticket revenue, the difference between the Cubs and Sox is a pretty good chunk of change. The White Sox now have some of the cheapest tickets in the league. I've posted it is still important but no longer makes or breaks a franchise. I believe that to be correct. I never stated it doesn't matter.

September 1 if then. Still decent chance not until 2018.

QUOTE (The Mighty Mite @ Jul 2, 2017 -> 05:34 PM) Actually we are competing with the American League and we need to be as good as the Yankees, Red Sox and for now the Astros. The White Sox are a big market team and need to step up and bring in big market players. Maybe when new ownership comes to pass but not before. And again, attendance no longer makes or breaks a franchise...this isn't the 1950's anymore. There are multiple revenue streams bringing in millions upon millions of dollars to teams and a lot of those streams are shared equally among all teams.