So is no one falling on the sword for 2018?

[caulfield12]

And it can't all be blamed on Moncada's "ADD," Kopech's injury, Tatis/Shields...it's something more endemic, or, if you prefer, systemic.

Steverson supporters will point to Palka and Narvaez, but those two guys are probably "complementary" pieces, at best, on a really good/contending playoff-caliber squad.  

Maybe Minnesota misjudged Palka, but they already had Mauer/Kepler/Vargas/Romero/eventually Morrison...and Minnesota's outfield dimensions are certainly more expansive than Guaranteed Rate Field.  He pretty much HAD to be a DH over there.  You'd think that there would be even more of a premium on power in that organization, playing in a stadium that's far from hitter-friendly.

[whitesoxbrad]

5 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

The White Sox play in a bandbox. Todd Steverson has been a hitting coach for 5 seasons. At least 3 of those seasons the Sox were trying to win. They have yet to score the league average in runs scored since he took over. Either he isn’t a very good coach, the people making out the roster aren’t good at recognizing hitters, ownership can’t afford better players, or some combination of the three. Some sort of change has to be made.

You are correct in everything you said, but unfortunately we do not have smart baseball people running any part

in this organization, the bottom line are wins and our Chicago whitesox have the fewest of any team in the last 6 years.

[caulfield12]

I wish we could get back to the "cockiness" of Balta from last off-season, talk about decimating/owning the AL Central year after year beginning in 2020/2021.

Those days seem to be like a half-decade ago right now.

[greg775]

2 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

I wish we could get back to the "cockiness" of Balta from last off-season, talk about decimating/owning the AL Central year after year beginning in 2020/2021.

Those days seem to be like a half-decade ago right now.

I like the negative Balta as he offsets the ever positive southsider IMO.

[greg775]

39 minutes ago, Fan O'Faust said:

It never gets said (with the lone exception by you) because it’s utter nonsense.  Blaming the continued futility of guys in the front office, who get paid the big bucks to produce a quality product on the field but don’t, on the fans defies reason.  It ain’t our fault, pal.

Your decades-long grudge against the fans really skews your thinking on this matter.  To even merely suggest our fan base, who has only seen our Sox go to the playoffs a scant five times since the 1959 World Series, is somehow “impatient” is absolute crazy talk.  It’s the exact opposite.  We are arguably THE most patient fan base around, what with so little we’ve had to cheer on during October our entire lives.  

I agree with Fan O'Faust. Our fans are great. Whenever I'd get depressed over fans on here wanting us to lose games, I'd see how our fans reacted when we did something positive in games at The Cell. Our home fans are into the games, at least the ones where we aren't trailing 7-1 after 3 or 4 and only wonder whether Davidson will pitch tonight.

[greg775]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Are people throwing decades long temper tantrums about Sears too?  Burning their Sears clothing to protest Sears leaving their town?  Creating local message boards to complain about the assistant managers of their local Sears team?  Are they talking about scouting the neighborhoods for the next up and coming cashiers?

Seriously, it is an awful comparison.

You are an interesting guy/poster. I get the feeling you think we have bad fans and bad fans on this board. Who is throwing a decade long temper tantrum about the Sox? Yes some of us are pissed and especially bring the venom in games in which we get blown out early or games in which some of our retread pitchers get rocked, but almost everybody on this board praises the Sox at some point. I think you overreact to how bad some of us fans are. I'm sure when I was a little kid to me the Sox could do no wrong and I'd be happy to just be at a game but now as an adult sure I get pissed especially when the team arguably is trying to suck. In conclusion ... I think we have good fans. Aren't you impressed like me at the crowds of 25,000 on some nights when we are 25 games out and those crowds cheer, too, where applicable?

Edited October 19, 2018 by greg775

[Eminor3rd]

2 hours ago, greg775 said:

You are an interesting guy/poster. I get the feeling you think we have bad fans and bad fans on this board. Who is throwing a decade long temper tantrum about the Sox? Yes some of us are pissed and especially bring the venom in games in which we get blown out early or games in which some of our retread pitchers get rocked, but almost everybody on this board praises the Sox at some point. I think you overreact to how bad some of us fans are. I'm sure when I was a little kid to me the Sox could do no wrong and I'd be happy to just be at a game but now as an adult sure I get pissed especially when the team arguably is trying to suck. In conclusion ... I think we have good fans. Aren't you impressed like me at the crowds of 25,000 on some nights when we are 25 games out and those crowds cheer, too, where applicable?

No one is calling anyone a bad fan. It’s just frustrating that several posters around here continually pretend like the team isn’t rebuilding. This thread title is absurd. Why would someone “fall on the sword” because the team’s record was bad? It’s meatball nonsense. 

Everyone that wants to see the front office literally murdered in public — don’t worry, this HAS to be their last chance. But it isn’t over yet, so you’re gonna have to let them finish. It does not make sense to murder their families and change course now, everything would be for naught. 

[southsider2k5]

11 hours ago, Fan O'Faust said:

It never gets said (with the lone exception by you) because it’s utter nonsense.  Blaming the continued futility of guys in the front office, who get paid the big bucks to produce a quality product on the field but don’t, on the fans defies reason.  It ain’t our fault, pal.

Your decades-long grudge against the fans really skews your thinking on this matter.  To even merely suggest our fan base, who has only seen our Sox go to the playoffs a scant five times since the 1959 World Series, is somehow “impatient” is absolute crazy talk.  It’s the exact opposite.  We are arguably THE most patient fan base around, what with so little we’ve had to cheer on during October our entire lives.  

The only nonsense is to try to call anyone but yourself angry.  This time you are trying to go back six decades, while calling yourself patient, even though the flight of the fan base since the last time the Sox won shows you are 100% wrong, again. 

[raBBit]

11 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

And it can't all be blamed on Moncada's "ADD," Kopech's injury, Tatis/Shields...it's something more endemic, or, if you prefer, systemic.

Steverson supporters will point to Palka and Narvaez, but those two guys are probably "complementary" pieces, at best, on a really good/contending playoff-caliber squad.  

Maybe Minnesota misjudged Palka, but they already had Mauer/Kepler/Vargas/Romero/eventually Morrison...and Minnesota's outfield dimensions are certainly more expansive than Guaranteed Rate Field.  He pretty much HAD to be a DH over there.  You'd think that there would be even more of a premium on power in that organization, playing in a stadium that's far from hitter-friendly.

?

[southsider2k5]

10 hours ago, greg775 said:

You are an interesting guy/poster. I get the feeling you think we have bad fans and bad fans on this board. Who is throwing a decade long temper tantrum about the Sox? Yes some of us are pissed and especially bring the venom in games in which we get blown out early or games in which some of our retread pitchers get rocked, but almost everybody on this board praises the Sox at some point. I think you overreact to how bad some of us fans are. I'm sure when I was a little kid to me the Sox could do no wrong and I'd be happy to just be at a game but now as an adult sure I get pissed especially when the team arguably is trying to suck. In conclusion ... I think we have good fans. Aren't you impressed like me at the crowds of 25,000 on some nights when we are 25 games out and those crowds cheer, too, where applicable?

Some of the more insecure posters here take this personally.  It isn't personal.  The numbers are there.  Sox fans leave in droves when the team isn't winning.  They come and go to extreme levels when compared to other fan bases.  That's their prerogative.  But the facts are facts.  Our attendance is down nearly 50% from its peak, and our viewing is down even more than that.  That isn't subjective.  That is reality.  The numbers are there.  I have yet to see a single person be able to answer that with anything other than the typical personal attacks and non sequitors.

The rest of this post isn't even worth wasting time on.

[southsider2k5]

8 hours ago, Eminor3rd said:

No one is calling anyone a bad fan. It’s just frustrating that several posters around here continually pretend like the team isn’t rebuilding. This thread title is absurd. Why would someone “fall on the sword” because the team’s record was bad? It’s meatball nonsense. 

Everyone that wants to see the front office literally murdered in public — don’t worry, this HAS to be their last chance. But it isn’t over yet, so you’re gonna have to let them finish. It does not make sense to murder their families and change course now, everything would be for naught. 

It is the ultimate in entitlement to be complaining about not making the playoffs in a year where even the management flat out said would be the bottom of the cycle.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

On 10/17/2018 at 10:21 AM, Dick Allen said:

They traded a struggling young guy for a struggling young guy. Please explain to me this claim you made:

 

you mean how Mark Buehrle, Jon Garland, Paul Konerko, Joe Crede, Aaron Rowand, Carlos Lee (traded for Scott Podsednik), Miguel Olivo, Jeremy Reed (Traded for Garcia), how those guys were all developed out of the strong, top-ranked White Sox system from 2000,

 

Paul Konerko, developed by the White Sox out of the 2000 system?  He has 29 plate appearances for White Sox minor league teams, and they were in 2008 and 2013. Carlos Lee? Might want to check where he was in 2000. It wasn't the minor leagues. Jeremy Reed was developed out the top ranked 2000 system even though he wasn't drafted until 2002. Miguel Olivo's first season with the White Sox organization was 2001. 

 

 

Has he always played fast and loose with the facts like he has been lately ? Seems like deliberately falsifying facts to fit his narrative. Seems odds for him.

[Thad Bosley]

9 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The only nonsense is to try to call anyone but yourself angry.  This time you are trying to go back six decades, while calling yourself patient, even though the flight of the fan base since the last time the Sox won shows you are 100% wrong, again. 

Lol - you and your psychobabble talk.  You are our resident Sox psychologist, I guess, ready to assess emotions at a moment's notice.  Such a service you provide - keep up the good work!

Meanwhile, going back to the topic at hand, referencing one, two, three, four, five, or even six decades of the recent White Sox fan experience is actually very appropriate, particularly when reckless and inaccurate accusations of the fan base being "impatient" are being tossed around willy nilly.  

[southsider2k5]

11 minutes ago, Fan O'Faust said:

Lol - you and your psychobabble talk.  You are our resident Sox psychologist, I guess, ready to assess emotions at a moment's notice.  Such a service you provide - keep up the good work!

Meanwhile, going back to the topic at hand, referencing one, two, three, four, five, or even six decades of the recent White Sox fan experience is actually very appropriate, particularly when reckless and inaccurate accusations of the fan base being "impatient" are being tossed around willy nilly.  

The facts are the facts.  The fans have left to nearly a 50% rate since 2005. In terms of TV ratings it is even worse. That isn't debatable.  Even as you continue to go back decades to justify your bitterness, the numbers are the numbers.  But keep up the personal attacks.  That is all you have left to resort to since the facts don't support you.

[caulfield12]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

The facts are the facts.  The fans have left to nearly a 50% rate since 2005. In terms of TV ratings it is even worse. That isn't debatable.  Even as you continue to go back decades to justify your bitterness, the numbers are the numbers.  But keep up the personal attacks.  That is all you have left to resort to since the facts don't support you.

Which fanbases in the Heartland and Rust Belt haven’t experienced the exact same phenomena when their teams were losing on an extended basis or rebuilding?

The Royals are WAY down now just three years removed from a World Series title.  Detroit is struggling mightily after filling the park under Ilitch.  Pirates are worse than Sox with much more competitive teams, and certainly an amount of relative/recent success.  Twins are way down despite a playoff appearance and new outdoor stadium.   Cleveland is still back up to just 23-24,000 after all those years of sellouts at Jacobs Field, and that’s with a long run of sustained success and more recent run of historic fan loyalty.  Tearing playoff teams apart twice really hurt, and they’ve never recovered after the 90s and financial crisis.  Baltimore, the same.  Cincy, the same.  7 in the same geographic region (roughly) that behave exactly like Sox fans, especially if you correct for newness of stadiums.

The reality is that unless you’re talking Cubs, Cardinals...nearly every franchise’s fans behaves fairly similarly.  Not too long ago, the Cubs and Sox had attendance numbers exactly on par, unless you accounted for the additional “tourist” fans who are mostly from outside of Chicagoland or traveling fans of teams visiting Wrigley.   And it’s also not typical for the Cards to give out a plethora of deals for over $100 million, they have always maintained a mid-market mentality when spending. 

Now if you want to argue Mariners, Brewers, Rockies and Padres fans are “better” somehow or more loyal...go ahead.  It certainly hasn’t resulted in much on-field success or immensely increased spending, other than those teams with $50-100 million more to allocate due to new RSN agreements.

 

Edited October 19, 2018 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

2 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Which fanbases in the Heartland and Rust Belt haven’t experienced the exact same phenomena when their teams were losing on an extended basis or rebuilding?

The Royals are WAY down now just three years removed from a World Series title.  Detroit is struggling mightily after filling the park under Ilitch.  Pirates are worse than Sox with much more competitive teams, and certainly an amount of relative/recent success.  Twins are way down despite a playoff appearance and new outdoor stadium.   Cleveland is still back up to just 23-24,000 after all those years of sellouts at Jacobs Field, and that’s with a long run of sustained success and more recent run of historic fan loyalty.  Tearing playoff teams apart twice really hurt, and they’ve never recovered after the 90s and financial crisis.  Baltimore, the same.  Cincy, the same.  7 in the same geographic region (roughly) that behave exactly like Sox fans, especially if you correct for newness of stadiums.

The reality is that unless you’re talking Cubs, Cardinals...nearly every franchise’s fans behaves fairly similarly.  Not too long ago, the Cubs and Sox had attendance numbers exactly on par, unless you accounted for the additional “tourist” fans who are mostly from outside of Chicagoland or traveling fans of teams visiting Wrigley.   And it’s also not typical for the Cards to give out a plethora of deals for over $100 million, they have always maintained a mid-market mentality when spending. 

Now if you want to argue Mariners, Brewers, Rockies and Padres fans are “better” somehow or more loyal...go ahead.  It certainly hasn’t resulted in much on-field success or immsensely increased spending, other than those teams with $50-100 million more to allocate due to new RSN agreements.

 

This is so many irrelevant words.  It also doesn't change anything, or matter.

[caulfield12]

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This is so many irrelevant words.  It also doesn't change anything, or matter.

All you do is make vague references to Wrigley and their “loyal” yuppie fans when there are NUMEROUS franchises who are better comparisons and who have also lost that same exact 50% over the last 10-15 years.  If I cited ALL those numbers, you still would be casting the same aspersions, which is that fans of the team with the worst record in baseball the past six years are being unusually disloyal when it happens nearly everywhere (see Houston 2012-14 as well.)

If you can’t accept that the Cubs or Cardinals (due to their historic success and franchise history) are anomalies and not the norm, there’s really nothing to say, is there?

You’re also basically the only one consistently making this same argument.

Or we can look at Mets/Yankees, A’s/SFG, Angels/Dodgers...the only team even close to getting out of its neighbors shadow is the Angels, and look at how many hundreds of millions more that Arte Moreno has spent to attempting to close that gap.

Repeating this same line over and over again doesn’t make it more true.  In fact, compared to other franchises, the Sox ROSE in the attendance standings while being less competitive.  Other franchises are bleeding even more fans than we are.

Edited October 19, 2018 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, caulfield12 said:

All you do is make vague references to Wrigley and their “loyal” yuppie fans when there are NUMEROUS franchises who are better comparisons and who have also lost that same exact 50% over the last 10-15 years.  If I cited ALL those numbers, you still would be casting the same aspersions, which is that fans of the team with the worst record in baseball the past six years are being unusually disloyal when it happens nearly everywhere (see Houston 2012-14 as well.)

If you can’t accept that the Cubs or Cardinals (due to their historic success and franchise history) are anomalies and not the norm, there’s really nothing to say, is there?

You’re also basically the only one consistently making this same argument.

Or we can look at Mets/Yankees, A’s/SFG, Angels/Dodgers...the only team even close to getting out of its neighbors shadow is the Angels, and look at how many hundreds of millions more that Arte Moreno has spent to attempt to close that gap.

The fact that there are other fan bases that don't show up for their teams doesn't mean the Sox fan base hasn't left in droves since 2005.  Again, what other teams have done is irrelevant to the facts at hand. 

[Jose Abreu]

I see we've reached the point in the rebuild where people

a.) forget why we're rebuilding or

b.) don't realize we're rebuilding

[caulfield12]

Just now, Jose Abreu said:

I see we've reached the point in the rebuild where people

a.) forget why we're rebuilding or

b.) don't realize we're rebuilding

B is 100% the responsibility of the front office and marketing department to break through the clutter somehow.

[southsider2k5]

7 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

I see we've reached the point in the rebuild where people

a.) forget why we're rebuilding or

b.) don't realize we're rebuilding

C.) Don't care and want to complain 

[Dick Allen]

Sox fans have not cooperated. That is a fact. But it is also a fact the current front office hasn't done a stellar job. Ultimately you are based on wins and losses. Cleveland has had a couple of AL Central dominant stretches. Minnesota had a dominant stretch. Detroit had a dominant stretch. KC sort of had a dominant stretch. Why can't the White Sox compete with these teams? 

[SCCWS]

Putting the title of the thread aside, the topic is meaningful. Rebuild or no rebuild, the FO should be reviewing all the coaches performance at the MLB level as well as the minors. Losing 100 games does not mean someone should get fired. But being in a rebuild, should not mean everyone gets retained. The organization should have some objective and subjective criteria to judge their employees.  In addition, someone above the FO should be judging the FO staff as to their performance.  

[Dick Allen]

7 minutes ago, SCCWS said:

Putting the title of the thread aside, the topic is meaningful. Rebuild or no rebuild, the FO should be reviewing all the coaches performance at the MLB level as well as the minors. Losing 100 games does not mean someone should get fired. But being in a rebuild, should not mean everyone gets retained. The organization should have some objective and subjective criteria to judge their employees.  In addition, someone above the FO should be judging the FO staff as to their performance.  

Jerry Krause always did something when he was running the Bulls that was pretty smart. In fact, it's how he actually landed Doug Collins to coach because he was one of the guys he hired to do this. He would bring in someone from the outside to evaluate their players and their staff. Being around guys all the time, or being the one that acquired him, or the one that thought he had a ton of potential, can cloud your judgement. Teams do fall in love with their players. I wonder if the White Sox do this. 

 

It would probably be nearly impossible to evaluate Steverson's day to day approach. But there could be some glaring things that he apparently has missed.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Dick Allen

[bmags]

30 minutes ago, SCCWS said:

Putting the title of the thread aside, the topic is meaningful. Rebuild or no rebuild, the FO should be reviewing all the coaches performance at the MLB level as well as the minors. Losing 100 games does not mean someone should get fired. But being in a rebuild, should not mean everyone gets retained. The organization should have some objective and subjective criteria to judge their employees.  In addition, someone above the FO should be judging the FO staff as to their performance.  

I love this post. 

Question for me is not whether the losses this year require wholesale changes. It's whether the progress this year indicated that no changes are needed to get the team where it wants to go.

Is it really necessary to wait until more consequential lapses in development or injuries before a coach is fired?

Clearly, talent aand youth had an issue to do with the team issuing the highest number of walks and lowest number of ks, and leading the league in ks on offense. But where does instruction and development staffs play there? Did the sox consider this a good job?

This doesn't require firing, but it may require hiring additional resources. I have a hard time believing after this year that the answer is "no this staff is clearly the one best positioned to get us to playoffs"