Price rising for Sale and Q

[southsider2k5]

The only risk IMO is the potential loss of season ticket holders. A lot of them may jump ship if a lengthy rebuild is on the agenda and you may never get some of them back. But that's a risk we need to take, because the half-ass going for it plans haven't done anything to keep these fans either.

 

Yeah, we still have a solid attendance number historically. There is a lot more to go down.

[Balta1701]

Except we could well be a 95 loss team when we are negotiating those rights.

Is that substantially worse than an 84 loss team?

[southsider2k5]

Is that substantially worse than an 84 loss team?

 

At the gate and for advertising purposes? I would think that answer would be obvious. You tell me.

[bighurt574]

The goal is not to trade for Heyward because he's good - it's the opposite. It's essentially taking on salary to allow us to get even more of their great players. Not dissimilar to when you retain salary to get more prospects.

 

You wouldn't consider it for Baez, Schwarber, Soler, and our pick of 3-4 prospects?

 

Wow. The Cubs would never do that deal.

[iamshack]

At the gate and for advertising purposes? I would think that answer would be obvious. You tell me.

I know it will hurt, but I just think we've got to take our medicine. And given what is going on on the other side of town, I really don't think it will be as big of a hit as you're arguing...the fans that are still around are the true loyal fans...if they haven't left yet, I don't think a whole lot more are going to leave at this point.

[Balta1701]

At the gate and for advertising purposes? I would think that answer would be obvious. You tell me.

I think the answer is pretty obvious. The White Sox had the 28th prime time TV ratings in MLB this year (Torotno not counted same way because different country). For a 78-84 win season, they had the 2nd worst TV ratings in baseball - only Oakland was worse. That follows a 2015 season where the White Sox had the worst TV ratings in baseball.

 

So basically, can we be worse than last or second to last in the league in TV ratings? No. It's fundamentally impossible to be worse than last. Aside from the people on this board, there is no one left watching this team.

[BigSqwert]

I think the answer is pretty obvious. The White Sox had the 28th prime time TV ratings in MLB this year (Torotno not counted same way because different country). For a 78-84 win season, they had the 2nd worst TV ratings in baseball - only Oakland was worse. That follows a 2015 season where the White Sox had the worst TV ratings in baseball.

 

So basically, can we be worse than last or second to last in the league in TV ratings? No. It's fundamentally impossible to be worse than last. Aside from the people on this board, there is no one left watching this team.

 

Holy crap. I knew it was bad, but this bad? Makes me reconsider the notion of them moving if the team was ever sold.

[Balta1701]

Holy crap. I knew it was bad, but this bad? Makes me reconsider the notion of them moving if the team was ever sold.

I still believe there's a market out there, but there's a nontrivial chance that the combination of the last 8 years of ongoing success with the what the Cubs just did - potentially grabbing within error every young fan in the city - could prove me wrong.

[Eminor3rd]

If the players you get in this deal don't turn out to be huge, not only have you given up all of the developmental time you put into the players, you also wasted the asset you had, and have to start over without both talent and assets.

 

Right, but that ALWAYS applies. The fact that the Sox have drafted poorly, for example, isn't a good reason to stop attending the draft.

 

It's pretty much an unprecedented trade to give up an ace signed cheaply for 3 more years. I really don't know if teams would be able to pay that much more than they would if he had 2 years left on his deal, which seems to be when guys get dealt now, and usually at a higher payroll number than Sale requires.

 

To me there is a limit on what teams can and will give up. Yes, he might be less valuable next year, but that doesn't necessarlly mean the package to acquire him will be less.

 

I agree with you totally on that point, and that's the type of thing that Hahn needs to figure out right now, ideally before the Winter Meetings.

 

 

I agree that now is the right time to strike, but I don't want to the Sox to settle for a so-so package just because. Sale, and Quintana will still have a boatload of trade value next summer, and next offseason.

 

I agree 100%. I think I wrote in some other thread that the right course is to enter the winter immediately as a seller to get a lay of the land. If an offer presents itself that seems fair (in the context of the seller's market, so more than you'd expect in an average market), the time to move is now -- because there isn't likely to be a better seller's market on the horizon. If the offers are low, we can afford to try again at the deadline. Sign some one-year veterans, hope to hit gold, and sell if you don't.

 

[ChiSox59]

I agree 100%. I think I wrote in some other thread that the right course is to enter the winter immediately as a seller to get a lay of the land. If an offer presents itself that seems fair (in the context of the seller's market, so more than you'd expect in an average market), the time to move is now -- because there isn't likely to be a better seller's market on the horizon. If the offers are low, we can afford to try again at the deadline. Sign some one-year veterans, hope to hit gold, and sell if you don't.

 

We're on the same page.

 

[southsider2k5]

I think the answer is pretty obvious. The White Sox had the 28th prime time TV ratings in MLB this year (Torotno not counted same way because different country). For a 78-84 win season, they had the 2nd worst TV ratings in baseball - only Oakland was worse. That follows a 2015 season where the White Sox had the worst TV ratings in baseball.

 

So basically, can we be worse than last or second to last in the league in TV ratings? No. It's fundamentally impossible to be worse than last. Aside from the people on this board, there is no one left watching this team.

 

Just because the ranking can't drop, doesn't mean the actual ratings can't drop. It can get worse.

[Chicago White Sox]

Then that doesn't make sense, because Sale and Eaton together would already need Schwarber, Baez, Soler, Almora, Edwards, etc. No need to add Heyward.

That I agree with

[Balta1701]

Just because the ranking can't drop, doesn't mean the actual ratings can't drop. It can get worse.

At this point, I think that might be more on the Cubs than anything else and how effectively what they just did takes over the remainder of the market. The White Sox are close enough to rock bottom that the only people who are turning in or buying tickets are the die-hards like those posting here. They're getting attendance and ratings that rival the least interesting last place teams in baseball. The only way that gets worse is if the fanbase itself continues to hemmorage people, and I think that will happen regardless of whether the total losses are 84 or 95 - the ratings of the last 2 years are strong evidence of that, winning 76-78 games was a complete and utter failure.

 

Basically, flailing wildly, cutting up jerseys, insisting they're important, and being out of the race on August 1 has made it within error of as bad as it can get. The White Sox have one option left - build a world series caliber team and be in the race in August. If they've simply lost the fanbase completely, then it's time to talk about moving.

[gatnom]

Nor is that money really even needed in today's environment, where plenty of money comes from tv rights and revenue sharing. They can take the hit at the gate for a few years. The fans will come back when the team starts playing well again. It isn't like they are dismantling the '98 Bulls or something.

 

100% agree here

 

 

[Balta1701]

I agree 100%. I think I wrote in some other thread that the right course is to enter the winter immediately as a seller to get a lay of the land. If an offer presents itself that seems fair (in the context of the seller's market, so more than you'd expect in an average market), the time to move is now -- because there isn't likely to be a better seller's market on the horizon. If the offers are low, we can afford to try again at the deadline. Sign some one-year veterans, hope to hit gold, and sell if you don't.

FWIW, here's our discussion in the other thread (I think it was really good back and forth by both of us) - I think that we're going to be in a substantially worse position if we wait until the deadline and my argument about why is there.

[iamshack]

FWIW, here's our discussion in the other thread (I think it was really good back and forth by both of us) - I think that we're going to be in a substantially worse position if we wait until the deadline and my argument about why is there.

Yeah, that was one of the best posts on this topic.

 

I feel like I've heard circular arguments otherwise since last August, when many expressed it was best to wait til the offseason rather than try and force a deal at the trade deadline. Now it seems as though we're already hearing arguments for why we can wait til the trade deadline again if we want.

 

I don't think ANYONE here is suggesting we MUST move Chris Sale and others at this point, but if the reason we're not moving him and others is because we're trying to "time the market," or we think we can make incremental improvements if we only wait a little longer, I believe that line of thinking and strategy is just wrong. It isn't just about maximizing the return on one or two players; it's about moving the entire organization in an entirely different, more productive direction than the one we've been trying for the last decade. While these first few trades are very critical to our future, this is an outstanding environment with which to make this transition.

 

So let's do it.

[Dick Allen]

I think if there is a team most motivated to overpay for Sale, it should be the Dodgers. Assuming Kershaw is 100% next season, he and Sale pretty much dominate the NL, and think of those 2 in the playoffs. Pretty much takes left handed hitters out of the equation. For the Cubs that is Rizzo and Schwarber.

 

And they can restock their farm system by signing a million international guys.

Edited November 7, 2016 by Dick Allen

[GGajewski18]

I think if there is a team most motivated to overpay for Sale, it should be the Dodgers. Assuming Kershaw is 100% next season, he and Sale pretty much dominate the NL, and think of those 2 in the playoffs. Pretty much takes left handed hitters out of the equation. For the Cubs that is Rizzo and Schwarber.

 

And they can restock their farm system by signing a million international guys.

 

Sale and Jones for Urias, Ryu, Pederson, De Leon, Bellinger, Verdugo, and Puig

[bmags]

I think if there is a team most motivated to overpay for Sale, it should be the Dodgers. Assuming Kershaw is 100% next season, he and Sale pretty much dominate the NL, and think of those 2 in the playoffs. Pretty much takes left handed hitters out of the equation. For the Cubs that is Rizzo and Schwarber.

 

And they can restock their farm system by signing a million international guys.

 

One thing I like about Dodgers is getting a handful of "interesting" guys to round out the deal as wildcards.

 

I don't like their headlining talent as much as others, however.

[SCCWS]

I think if there is a team most motivated to overpay for Sale, it should be the Dodgers. Assuming Kershaw is 100% next season, he and Sale pretty much dominate the NL, and think of those 2 in the playoffs. Pretty much takes left handed hitters out of the equation. For the Cubs that is Rizzo and Schwarber.

And they can restock their farm system by signing a million international guys.

 

 

Rizzo is a +.300 hitter against them is his career albeit 20 ABs. Schwarber has never faced either

[Dick Allen]

Rizzo is a +.300 hitter against them is his career albeit 20 ABs. Schwarber has never faced either

Schwarber cannot hit lefties. I'd take my changes the trend doesn't continue with Rizzo against those 2. Bryant also struck out his first 6 AB vs. Sale.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Sale and Jones for Urias, Ryu, Pederson, De Leon, Bellinger, Verdugo, and Puig

 

 

I'd do Sale and Jones for: Urias, Bellinger, Verdugo, Calhoun, and Lux in a heartbeat. Dodgers probably wouldn't though.

[SCCWS]

Yeah, that was one of the best posts on this topic.

 

I feel like I've heard circular arguments otherwise since last August, when many expressed it was best to wait til the offseason rather than try and force a deal at the trade deadline. Now it seems as though we're already hearing arguments for why we can wait til the trade deadline again if we want.

 

I don't think ANYONE here is suggesting we MUST move Chris Sale and others at this point, but if the reason we're not moving him and others is because we're trying to "time the market," or we think we can make incremental improvements if we only wait a little longer, I believe that line of thinking and strategy is just wrong. It isn't just about maximizing the return on one or two players; it's about moving the entire organization in an entirely different, more productive direction than the one we've been trying for the last decade. While these first few trades are very critical to our future, this is an outstanding environment with which to make this transition.

 

So let's do it.

 

There is also an in-between approach. Hahn could go into the winter meetings offering both Sale and Q and taking the best offer if either fills his wish list. Keep the other which I would assume would be Sale since I don't see a team trading 4 or 5 top prospects. They can also try and trade Frazier or Melky as well. Then the front office will get a better feel for what they have in spring training and first half of next season. Then next July try again to trade either Sale or Q for another prospect package with the intent of filling some holes the winter didn't fill. That also gives the staff a chance this winter to work with 3 -5 new prospects as opposed to 7-9. So you are stretching a full rebuild to this winter, next July and finish off next winter.

Edited November 7, 2016 by SCCWS

[oldsox]

I'd do Sale and Jones for: Urias, Bellinger, Verdugo, Calhoun, and Lux in a heartbeat. Dodgers probably wouldn't though.

No Puig?

[ChiSox59]

No Puig?

 

As a throw in? I guess? If the Dodgers attribute any real value value to him (and I think they do) - then no way in a Sale/Q trade.