Lip Man 1

QUOTE (FT35 @ Jun 27, 2016 -> 11:43 AM) We have to be careful because this is the type of deal people throw stones at if it doesn't pan out. Getting those 2 would likely cost us several pieces of our farm system. So now, Hahn needs to save his job by making a trade that everyone will accuse him of screwing up because Reddick and Vogt are vets?? Our fan base needs to pull on the same end of the rope in what they rake our management over the coals for. DO we want youth or do we want vets? The proven vet trades haven't worked out, but it seems like all the people who throw stones at management for making such deals, are the same ones calling for them to be made to save the guy's job! Hahn was a genius to land Samardzija--exactly the RHP starter that we needed--then Holy CRAP...Hahn is an idiot for trading pieces of our farm system to get a scrub like Samardzija. Hahn needs to find a way to land a proven starter like James Shields if he wants to save his job--then--we need to FIRE Hahn because he brings in losers like James Shields! You can see it...Finally...Hahn makes a great deal to land Reddick and Vogt!!! Just what we needed!!! Then Vogt hits the DL the same week Reddick goes into a 3-25 slump and the masses prepare for a stoning and life without Carson Fulmer. Post has a lot of truth in it, in my opinion. That's what happens though when the organizational philosophy seems to be muddled and fans generally have no idea if the team is "rebuilding," "going for it" and so forth. In addition the Sox themselves have never really seemed willing to go all in, as in spend a tremendous amount of money on the farm system or raising the payroll high enough to get the top free agents when they become available. They are caught between the proverbial "rock and a hard place..." and that filters down to the fan base. Mark

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jun 27, 2016 -> 09:57 AM) Where it gets interesting at Camp Reinsdorf is when the Chairman decides to weigh in with his views about getting from "Point A to Point B to Point C". Remember that doozy from back when Larry Himes was the GM in the late 80s? By year four of Himes' term he had built as strong of a core of young talent as you could hope for, collected through both strong draft choices and shrewd trades, resulting in a 94 win season in Himes' fourth year. Yet in his relentless wisdom, Reinsdorf decided to give Himes the heave-ho at the end of that fourth year, reasoning in somewhat of a flimsy fashion that he felt while Himes was able to get the team from "Point A to Point B", he didn't think he was the guy to get the team to "Point C". (Meanwhile, the guy he brought into replace Himes, Ron Schueler, spent ten years failing to get the team to Point C himself, but I digress!). But here we are in Year Five under Hahn's direction, and Point B doesn't appear to be anywhere in sight. I guess the famed loyalty program wasn't quite as established back in Himes' day as it appears to be today. Too bad for Larry! Himes was fired because JR didn't get along with him. The straw that broke the camels back happened at the trade deadline of 1990 according to what Jeff Torborg told me: ML: At the trade deadline the Sox were only three games behind the A’s yet the only thing the organization did was get reserve outfielder Phil Bradley from the Orioles. Were you disappointed especially since there was a lot of talk about the Sox getting guys like pitcher Mike Scott? JT: “Sure we were disappointed especially since that same day the A’s picked up Harold Baines and Willie McGee. I was sitting in my hotel room when I saw the news come across the TV and I thought ‘how did that happen?’ because we were behind Oakland, we could have put in a claim. At almost the same time I was thinking this I got a call from Jerry Reinsdorf and he asked me ‘what’s going on?’ All I could tell him was that I didn’t know.” “And you mentioned Mike Scott…this is the first time I’ve ever heard anything like that. If that’s true that just goes to show you that I wasn’t involved in everything that may have been going on. (Author’s Note: ESPN’s “Baseball Tonight’s” lead anchor Dave Marash reported when Larry Himes was fired in mid September, that part of the reason was, that he wasn’t interested in trading any of his minor league talent for more highly regarded players for the stretch drive. This apparently caused a wedge between him and ownership.) JR himself in a rare interview came right out and said why Himes was fired when he went on Chet Coppock's radio show that September. It basically was a Thibs comment years before that went down: “The fact is, Larry Himes cannot get along with anybody. You can hardly find anybody in the Sox organization that wasn’t happy when Larry Himes left.” Regarding the Hahn column, it's only natural that if the team continues to spin its wheels seemingly without direction (rebuild? reload? three year plan?) questions are going to start being asked about the decision makers above Ventura. Mark

Since I realistically don't think this team can contend (because they simply can't beat teams in their division other than Minnesota...so far anyway) I at least hope they can have a winning season when it's all done record-wise and Sale gets to 20 victories. Mark

In case you're wondering about details from the first time the Sox hit seven home runs in a game: April 23, 1955 - The White Sox hammered the Athletics 29-6 at Kansas City. The 29 runs was an American League record for years. The Sox hit seven home runs that night. Walt Dropo and Bob Nieman each had seven RBI’s. Sherm Lollar and “Minnie” Minoso added five each. Mark

QUOTE (Condor13 @ Jun 25, 2016 -> 03:38 PM) First team since 2004 to lose when hitting 7+ HRs Who was that team? Just wondering. Sox tied the club record today with seven home runs in a game. Set originally in April 1955 in the Sox 29-6 destruction of the Kansas City A's. Mark

23 years ago, June 22, 1993 Carlton Fisk Night was celebrated at Comiskey Park II. It was the night Fisk's passed Bob Boone's record for most games caught in a big league career. The crowd went wild when Bo Jackson drove a motorcycle in from center field to present to Pudge at home plate and then Fisk spoke to the fans acknowledging his night. Halfway down this page you can hear some of the audio of that speech: http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2016/06/t...-day-walsh-day/ Mark

I guess for Shields allowing five hits and walking four in five innings is an "improvement..." Mark

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Jun 23, 2016 -> 07:34 PM) So did Anderson and Eaton. Eaton had a pretty good series but he was hitting .280 ish and didn't deliver either. I believe the announcers said the White Sox have won more World Series titles in the last 90 years than they swept series in Boston. 3 out of 4 on the road is a solid week. Sox last swept a four game series in Boston in 1927 I believe. Mark

The only consistent thing about the Sox is the inconsistency. Pitch well...can't score. Score runs...can't pitch for s***. But in reality when you twice have the bases loaded and nobody out and don't score, you're begging to get beat...and they did. Robin better hope the starters go deep this weekend. Bullpen is blown out and is a mess. Albers simply has lost it. Astonishing how far he fallen in two months and that contract extension Kenny Hahn gave Jones isn't looking great right now either. Speaking of Kenny Hahn, Robin gets a lot of crap (deservedly so) but he really doesn't have any type of bench to go to. Sox may have the worst in the league, Kenny Hahn didn't give him a lot of depth have they? Three out of four is nice but it also would have been nice to get back to the living and over .500. Mark

Unfortunate that when the team finally decides to score some runs for him, Q has a bad game. Now we'll see what happens with Shields Thursday. If he has a good game for a change maybe I'll start to believe a little bit again. It would be nice if they could win some games against divisional opponents for a change. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 21, 2016 -> 03:04 PM) OK. The question remains, who do you think he would sell to? I think it's sold after he dies. He will always own the team. I agree. Unless his health goes south in a hurry I think he keeps it until the day he passes. Then? Nobody really knows. I've asked some folks I know in the media just what they thought if there was any speculation and nobody really knows. Phil Rogers told me that actually had a meeting about this in the Tribune sports department to try to get a sense of what could happen and plan for it and there wasn't a consensus. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 21, 2016 -> 01:35 PM) Do you think JR sells to the other owners or do they all sell? Forbes estimates he owns 19% of the team. He wouldn't really benefit much personally from a sale. Interesting question. I've never heard of any other part owner of the Sox being interested. The only name I was ever told was the guy who owned the Memphis NBA franchise. He was from the Chicago area. Unfortunately he passed away a few years ago I think from cancer. And as I understand it JR does not need permission from the other part owners to sell. The decision is completely his. Mark

A poster at another Sox web site, compiled a list of positive and negative items in their opinion Hahn has done. I submit it here without comment for discussion purposes since that seems to be a running debate right now. "There are basically 4 things I think Hahn has done well, and 2 of them are contract based. 1.) Sale's contract 2.) Quintana's contract 3.) Sign Abreu 4.) Trade for Eaton The rest of his timeline as GM is a mess. 1.) Chose Flowers over Pierzynski 2.) Jeff Keppinger for $12 million 3.) Traded Matt Thornton (who was still productive last year and has played in the postseason) for no MLB talent. 4.) Traded Jake Peavy (who went on to contribute for 2 World Series champs) into Avisail Garcia 5.) Traded Alex Rios (who went on to contribute for a World Series champ) into Leury Garcia. 6.) Extended Robin Ventura 7.) Paul Konerko's last 2 years for $16 million 8.) Addison Reed for Matt Davidson 9.) Rushed Rodon to MLB 10.) Traded Dunn, Beckham, and De Aza (2 of the 3 having an impact on postseason games) for no MLB talent 11.) Adam LaRoche for $25 million 12.) Jeff Samardzija for Marcus Semien, Josh Phegley, and $10 million 13.) Melky Cabrera for $42 million 14.) David Robertson for $46 million 15.) Todd Frazier for Trayce Thompson, Micah Johnson, and $16.5 million 16.) Mat Latos 17.) Jimmy Rollins 18.) Waiting at least 2 years too long before releasing John Danks 19.) James Shields for Erik Johnson and $27 million 20.) Has refused to fire the coaching staff. 21.) Spent five million on utility infielders Beckham and Bonifacio who did nothing." Feel free to comment on what you think. I agree with some of the items, disagree with some others. Mark

That's about the last thing this battered bullpen needs. Reminds me of August 2010, when Sox bullpen guys were dropping like flies, they had no one to replace them and they fell out of the race after leading the division if I recall right on August 1. Mark

South: Agree. It's not just one area a basic fix or a simple fix. Like I said the Sox are between a rock and a hard place with no easy solutions and no easy answers. Mark

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 19, 2016 -> 11:48 AM) That is a well reasoned post. I disagree withat a few points. The baseball that has been played there is some of the best in the world. Far above college, MiLB, independent league, etc. With the team winning close to 50% of the time. If the Sox do not deserve fan support than baseball in America doesn't deserve any support. The league should drop half the teams at least. Tex: It sounds to me and I may be wrong about this, that part of the way you look at the sport is the sport itself. By that I mean you look at taking pleasure out of watching (on paper) the best players in the world play the game and enjoy the game for the game's sake. Nothing wrong with that, and I won't belittle that viewpoint. I disagree with it, as Bobby Knight once said, "if winning or losing doesn't matter why the hell do they keep score..." White Sox fans I think used to at least have confidence in the fact that the team probably was going to have a winning season at least and be very competitive. Based on the last nine plus seasons I don't think they can even believe that anymore. Mark

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Jun 19, 2016 -> 02:32 PM) I'm sure Robin is gone now. Unfortunately I'm not convinced he's going anywhere. Robertson hasn't been the same pitcher by the way since Robin let him get his brains beat in, in K.C. You wonder if mentally that's simply fried him. Mark

QUOTE (Tex @ Jun 19, 2016 -> 07:25 AM) Mark, you are an intelligent guy, please follow my point here and see what you think. You bring up a great point and one that perpetually follows Sox baseball. While your point is that simple, it is also more complex. Let's look at restaurants. Is your favorite restaurant a Michelin three star rated place? There are thirteen in all of the United States, more than World Series winning baseball teams, about the same as playoff teams in baseball. By baseball standards all of the other restaurants are not worthy of visiting because they are not winning. Their product is not very good compared to these thirteen. There are two Michelin three star restaurants in Chicago. If you go to any other restaurant you are supporting mediocrity or worst. So what can a restaurant do to earn your business that isn't winning? Provide a great atmosphere, great service, be a good fit for your entertainment dollar. Family friendly if you need that. They need to provide a quality experience for the time and money you invest. It would then follow that the Sox need to make certain they have set the table for a quality experience. They know that both teams will play some of the highest level baseball on the planet. (After all it is the MLB, name a better league anywhere). The home team may not win. But if your favorite actor is in a movie, do you care if the movie wins an Academy award of not? For the out of town Sox fans here, it seems like everyone gets to a game when they are in town, no matter how the team is doing. I'm catching a Sunday game against Detroit. Why? Because of the experience. Seeing the stadium and everything that surrounds a MLB baseball game. If fans judge the quality of the experience strictly on the outcome, they will eventually always be unhappy and most years will never attend a game. Of course we are talking about the casual fan, not the diehards here who will generally buy tickets. So no, sports teams don't function exactly like a restaurant, dry cleaners, etc. All of those other examples can earn your loyalty without being one of the top four or five in world. Sports teams also need to beat every other competitor on top of doing everything else great. Tex: First off thank you for the compliment. An interesting post and your points are logical and have some validity to them. I guess it depends on your definition of "winning" though. In my case, speaking just for me only, I've always considered the season a "success" if the Sox simply win more games than they lost. At least (and this is the bare minimum) at the end of the year they can look the fans in the eye and say, "we won more than we lost." I don't think and never have thought that winning the World Series is the only definition of "success." So like in your post, to me there are ways the Sox can achieve success without being the ultimate "Michelin-type" winner. That is to at least win more games than they lose and to make an EXPANDED (easier to achieve) goal of post season play more than once every seven to eight years. At this point the Sox have been unable to do either of these what I consider modest benchmarks. They haven't had a winning season since 2012, they haven't had consecutive winning seasons since 2003-2006 and they haven't made the playoffs since 2008 (Only Seattle, Miami and San Diego have gone longer...) The fact that these benchmarks aren't being met and again I think they are modest for a major market team, I can understand why they lost attendance from the previous season in eight of the previous nine years and why a major shakeup is needed. If not, I fear things are only going to get worse. Enjoyed your reasonable and thoughtful post though! Mark

They should but they won't. Probably to stubborn to admit it. Mark

To me it's a simple concept and really I'm amazed some folks just don't get it. The Sox are no different from a restaurant or the hardware store or the local cleaners. They are ALL businesses first and foremost. If they put out a poor product, customers will not do business with them. They are under absolutely no obligation to do so. Would you keep going back to that restaurant if they keep getting your order wrong for example and the food is bad? Now add in a taxpayer funded ballpark, perhaps the biggest "sweetheart lease" in baseball and millions of dollars in income and to me, customers who support bad baseball (or a bad steak or a bad hammer or a dirty shirt) well...they are the ones who I think should be rethinking the situation. To each his own I guess. Mark

I'm of two minds right now regarding Shields and this entire situation. Part of me still holds out some slim hope that by firing Ventura, making some moves maybe they still have a chance. But part of me also hopes he gets bombed every time out. Maybe total embarrassment (and owing 27 million) are the only things that would finally get it through JR's head that this entire front office needs to go. The problem with that strategy is though that even that might not move an 80 year old owner off the dime. Or maybe Shields will save everyone and pull a LaRoche and retire? Really tough to be a Sox fan right now or for the last decade. Mark

All I can say is WOW. Think Rick is sweating a little bit right now given that he admitted even JR had some question about getting Shields? Mark

What's the Plan?"... Good question...maybe we need to ask Kenny since it was about a year ago he told the media 2015 was the first year of the three year plan / window. He hasn't said much since then to the best of my knowledge. My guess is more of the same until new ownership...basically "contending while rebuilding" which basically hasn't worked for this franchise and as others have posted "half measures" without a real commitment to one area or philosophy. Mark

The only thing I can think of is the players know what's going on with him and they start pressing to try to get him some runs...which only seems to make things worse. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 17, 2016 -> 10:40 AM) Actually you are wrong. Majority shareholder is 50% +1. Seems to me you are splitting hairs from a legal perspective. The Sox have so many investors no one has 50% +1. The reality is though he has the most ownership shares, he has the largest percentage AND he has the power to control the day to day operations in his contract. From a practical standpoint he is the "majority". 50% + 1 or not. Mark