Teoscar Hernandez signs with the Dodgers

[WhiteSox2023]

23 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

The Rangers went out and signed Corey Seager, Marcus Semien and Jacob DeGrom, so it's not like the Rangers are the Tampa Bay Rays. 

$195K versus $181K.  I’m sure Jerry could’ve afforded $14K more.  The problem is that Jerry sucked at everything else, as in hiring his own organization.

Edited yesterday at 06:59 AM by WhiteSox2023

[T R U]

The Dodgers built a brand and reap the rewards of it. If the Sox spent the money, filled the stadium every game, and built a competitive marketable product they would be printing money just like the Dodgers. 
 

While it does suck the same handful of teams are the only ones signing these players and trading for the superstars, they weren’t given an advantage they built it. It’s 2025 for fucks sake how do you get away with $75 million being the largest contract you’ve ever given out. Same goes for all these other teams that aren’t interested in trying. 

[bmags]

I unno I think the dodgers are smarter than me but if I could pick a misstep it would be signing a 32 year old outfielder for 3 years. They will survive but not the signing that sends shivers down my spine.

[Chicago White Sox]

5 hours ago, T R U said:

The Dodgers built a brand and reap the rewards of it. If the Sox spent the money, filled the stadium every game, and built a competitive marketable product they would be printing money just like the Dodgers. 
 

While it does suck the same handful of teams are the only ones signing these players and trading for the superstars, they weren’t given an advantage they built it. It’s 2025 for fucks sake how do you get away with $75 million being the largest contract you’ve ever given out. Same goes for all these other teams that aren’t interested in trying. 

This simply isn’t true though.  Metro market size matters.  Regional market size matters.  The Yankees & Dodgers are 100% provided an advantage over almost every other team.  There is literally nothing the Sox could do to get an $8 billion TV deal like the Dodgers have.  The Cardinals, one of the best examples of a well run small market franchise, have a TV deal that’s estimated to be about 1/5 of the Dodgers on annual basis.  These clubs will never be printing money like the Dodgers…that’s just not how the economics of the sport work.

Having said that, there is no doubt the Sox would be a stronger franchise if they invested in their product up-front and actually drove fan interest.  A lot of our challenges are self inflicted under Jerry’s ownership.  Hopefully that will all change with a new owner and we can begin to bridge the gap between us and the large market clubs.  There is literally no hope for the true small market franchises under this current rule set.  Yes, a handful will make the playoffs each year and every once in a while one will win the World Series.  But making the playoffs will continue to be skewed towards large market clubs unfortunately until a salary cap (and ideally a salary floor) is put in place.

[bmags]

18 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This simply isn’t true though.  Metro market size matters.  Regional market size matters.  The Yankees & Dodgers are 100% provided an advantage over almost every other team.  There is literally nothing the Sox could do to get an $8 billion TV deal like the Dodgers have.  The Cardinals, one of the best examples of a well run small market franchise, have a TV deal that’s estimated to be about 1/5 of the Dodgers on annual basis.  These clubs will never be printing money like the Dodgers…that’s just not how the economics of the sport work.

Having said that, there is no doubt the Sox would be a stronger franchise if they invested in their product up-front and actually drove fan interest.  A lot of our challenges are self inflicted under Jerry’s ownership.  Hopefully that will all change with a new owner and we can begin to bridge the gap between us and the large market clubs.  There is literally no hope for the true small market franchises under this current rule set.  Yes, a handful will make the playoffs each year and every once in a while one will win the World Series.  But making the playoffs will continue to be skewed towards large market clubs unfortunately until a salary cap (and ideally a salary floor) is put in place.

I have many layers to my disdain for Jerry (one here is he could have used his power in ownership to create more favorable competitive rules for his club, not just align against labor)…

but it is true that the only real model for success Sox could emulate is the braves. And they may operate as a big market club soon, but they are similar in stretching up budgets with competitive teams, but not often players for big FAs.

We can’t say Sox should be the guardians or brewers because they don’t get the additional goodies. They need to actually be better in drafting and player development while using the additional payroll they have extremely wisely (I.e. re-signing stars unlike Cleveland, but not just signing addl bullpen help).

Thats actually an extremely tight rope to walk, and why I don’t really have tolerance for the Sox so often settling for being average at some aspect of team building when they need to be exceptional at 2-3 to survive

[T R U]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This simply isn’t true though.  Metro market size matters.  Regional market size matters.  The Yankees & Dodgers are 100% provided an advantage over almost every other team.  There is literally nothing the Sox could do to get an $8 billion TV deal like the Dodgers have.  The Cardinals, one of the best examples of a well run small market franchise, have a TV deal that’s estimated to be about 1/5 of the Dodgers on annual basis.  These clubs will never be printing money like the Dodgers…that’s just not how the economics of the sport work.

Having said that, there is no doubt the Sox would be a stronger franchise if they invested in their product up-front and actually drove fan interest.  A lot of our challenges are self inflicted under Jerry’s ownership.  Hopefully that will all change with a new owner and we can begin to bridge the gap between us and the large market clubs.  There is literally no hope for the true small market franchises under this current rule set.  Yes, a handful will make the playoffs each year and every once in a while one will win the World Series.  But making the playoffs will continue to be skewed towards large market clubs unfortunately until a salary cap (and ideally a salary floor) is put in place.

You may be right, and probably are for the small market teams, but I need to see it to believe it for the White Sox. A quick google search shows me the largest TV markets in the US are Los Angeles, New York, and…. Chicago. 

[Timmy U]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I don’t really have tolerance for the Sox so often settling for being average at some aspect of team building when they need to be exceptional at 2-3 to survive

I will kill for them to be average at 1 thing. Maybe Bannister is doing that with pitching development, but they aren’t there yet. Everything else, they seem to be bottom third or lower.

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This simply isn’t true though.  Metro market size matters.  Regional market size matters.  The Yankees & Dodgers are 100% provided an advantage over almost every other team.  There is literally nothing the Sox could do to get an $8 billion TV deal like the Dodgers have.  The Cardinals, one of the best examples of a well run small market franchise, have a TV deal that’s estimated to be about 1/5 of the Dodgers on annual basis.  These clubs will never be printing money like the Dodgers…that’s just not how the economics of the sport work.

Having said that, there is no doubt the Sox would be a stronger franchise if they invested in their product up-front and actually drove fan interest.  A lot of our challenges are self inflicted under Jerry’s ownership.  Hopefully that will all change with a new owner and we can begin to bridge the gap between us and the large market clubs.  There is literally no hope for the true small market franchises under this current rule set.  Yes, a handful will make the playoffs each year and every once in a while one will win the World Series.  But making the playoffs will continue to be skewed towards large market clubs unfortunately until a salary cap (and ideally a salary floor) is put in place.

You're overlooking the key point of how the Sox' ineptitude could end up pushing all four AL Central divisional rivals into the post season in 2025.

[Balta1701]

2 hours ago, bmags said:

I have many layers to my disdain for Jerry (one here is he could have used his power in ownership to create more favorable competitive rules for his club, not just align against labor)…

but it is true that the only real model for success Sox could emulate is the braves. And they may operate as a big market club soon, but they are similar in stretching up budgets with competitive teams, but not often players for big FAs.

We can’t say Sox should be the guardians or brewers because they don’t get the additional goodies. They need to actually be better in drafting and player development while using the additional payroll they have extremely wisely (I.e. re-signing stars unlike Cleveland, but not just signing addl bullpen help).

Thats actually an extremely tight rope to walk, and why I don’t really have tolerance for the Sox so often settling for being average at some aspect of team building when they need to be exceptional at 2-3 to survive

I don’t see how you can say the only team the Sox could operate like is the Braves. If we look around the league there are tons of strong markets that aren’t the Mets, Yankees, or Dodgers, where teams regularly make the playoffs and occasionally win titles.

If we go through the biggest 8 metro areas, we have NY, LA, Chicago, DFW, Houston, atlanta, and Philly. Those teams don’t make the playoffs every year, they have rebuilding stretches, but aside from 2 teams, they have multi year playoff runs and occasionally win titles. Good enough should be the Phillies or Rangers or Cubs or Astros.

The only teams in big markets that stand out as different are the Angels and White Sox. Once you get to metro area 9 you get Miami and they’re the first actual team in a big market that acts small.

[southsider2k5]

14 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Oh no doubt, but Jerry won’t spend the money up-front to build a best in class product.

There is zero reason for the Sox to not significantly out spend the entire ALC for starters.  Same with the Cubs in the NLC.

[WhiteSox2023]

5 hours ago, bmags said:

I unno I think the dodgers are smarter than me but if I could pick a misstep it would be signing a 32 year old outfielder for 3 years. They will survive but not the signing that sends shivers down my spine.

It will likely be a bad signing after year one but it’s a drop in the bucket to them.  Just like the Edman signing.

Edited 16 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[Chicago White Sox]

6 hours ago, T R U said:

You may be right, and probably are for the small market teams, but I need to see it to believe it for the White Sox. A quick google search shows me the largest TV markets in the US are Los Angeles, New York, and…. Chicago. 

They are but LA is still way bigger than Chicago and the reality is the days of mega TV deals are over with.  The Dodgers have a major locked in advantage for the remainder of their TV deal.  Again, I’m not suggesting Jerry deserves a free pass either, but imagine being a Reds fan right now and watching the Dodgers sign a ton of mega free agents and still add $22M AAV role players.  Every other league has moved to a salary cap / floor structure for a reason and they are all the better for it.

[Chicago White Sox]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

There is zero reason for the Sox to not significantly out spend the entire ALC for starters.  Same with the Cubs in the NLC.

100% agree…it’s absolutely absurd.  And that’s why the Sox will be attractive to future buyers.  The potential is there to be a strong franchise given the lack of a salary cap and the size of our market vs. the rest of the AL Central, but need an owner who will take some losses early on, will actually sign stars in free agency, and doesn’t live in fear of a bad long-term deal.

[Lip Man 1]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

100% agree…it’s absolutely absurd.  And that’s why the Sox will be attractive to future buyers.  The potential is there to be a strong franchise given the lack of a salary cap and the size of our market vs. the rest of the AL Central, but need an owner who will take some losses early on, will actually sign stars in free agency, and doesn’t live in fear of a bad long-term deal.

Very well said. 

[Balta1701]

2 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

100% agree…it’s absolutely absurd.  And that’s why the Sox will be attractive to future buyers.  The potential is there to be a strong franchise given the lack of a salary cap and the size of our market vs. the rest of the AL Central, but need an owner who will take some losses early on, will actually sign stars in free agency, and doesn’t live in fear of a bad long-term deal.

But because it’s value has been dismantled, if you are looking to buy a team and move them, they are also clearly movable.

[Lip Man 1]

21 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

But because it’s value has been dismantled, if you are looking to buy a team and move them, they are also clearly movable.

Any franchise in theory is movable but where are you going to go? Again I refer back to the stories and the Sports Illustrated article that stated a Nashville expansion team could garner 2 billion dollars. That's a lot more than relocating the White Sox to Nashville, Montreal, New Orleans, Salt Lake City, Portland or Timbuktu is going to bring in.

And as we all know the most important thing to those running the show in MLB is $$$$$$$$$$.

I know your position is the Sox are moving, my position is they aren't going anywhere (as TLR recently said). Time will tell who is right.  

 

 

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

100% agree…it’s absolutely absurd.  And that’s why the Sox will be attractive to future buyers.  The potential is there to be a strong franchise given the lack of a salary cap and the size of our market vs. the rest of the AL Central, but need an owner who will take some losses early on, will actually sign stars in free agency, and doesn’t live in fear of a bad long-term deal.

And a ton of the value add is tied to this market 

[southsider2k5]

38 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Any franchise in theory is movable but where are you going to go? Again I refer back to the stories and the Sports Illustrated article that stated a Nashville expansion team could garner 2 billion dollars. That's a lot more than relocating the White Sox to Nashville, Montreal, New Orleans, Salt Lake City, Portland or Timbuktu is going to bring in.

And as we all know the most important thing to those running the show in MLB is $$$$$$$$$$.

I know your position is the Sox are moving, my position is they aren't going anywhere (as TLR recently said). Time will tell who is right.  

 

 

MLB could also preserve the 2nd team rights in Chicago and sell that franchise for $2 billion as well, that is if Jerry was stupid enough to leave. 

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

But because it’s value has been dismantled, if you are looking to buy a team and move them, they are also clearly movable.

I don’t see any sort of financial rationalization for moving them to a smaller market when the league is already thinking about expansion.  The potential of Chicago is far greater than other market without a team currently.

[Lip Man 1]

By the way it should also be noted that nine teams have to pay luxury tax penalty money this year (aka a soft salary cap) including the Cubs.

It's not just the Dodgers trying to win.  

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

48 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

By the way it should also be noted that nine teams have to pay luxury tax penalty money this year (aka a soft salary cap) including the Cubs.

It's not just the Dodgers trying to win.  

Is there a breakdown after every season of what teams paid into the luxury tax , how much it all amounted to and how it's distributed to other teams ?

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Is there a breakdown after every season of what teams paid into the luxury tax , how much it all amounted to and how it's distributed to other teams ?

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/43082037/dodgers-mets-yankees-top-mlb-record-9-luxury-tax-offenders
 

Quote

The first $3.5 million of proceeds is used to fund player benefits. Fifty percent of the remainder goes to player retirement funds, while the other half goes into the supplemental commissioner's discretionary fund and is redistributed among teams that receive revenue sharing.

For the 15 or so revenue sharing teams that’s about a $10 million check this year.

[hi8is]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/43082037/dodgers-mets-yankees-top-mlb-record-9-luxury-tax-offenders
 

For the 15 or so revenue sharing teams that’s about a $10 million check this year.

The fact that we’re not listed as a revenue sharing team should speak volumes.

[WhiteSox2023]

3 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/43082037/dodgers-mets-yankees-top-mlb-record-9-luxury-tax-offenders
 

For the 15 or so revenue sharing teams that’s about a $10 million check this year.

And I hope people note that this is just one part of revenue sharing — luxury tax distribution.  It has nothing to do with other shared earnings for MLB.TV, etc.  Jerry and his other fellow loser owners will never pay luxury tax but will reap the benefits from the teams that actually want to win.  Jerry cashes checks left and right without even doing anything.  This is another reason that a salary cap isn’t the ultimate solution.

Edited 1 hour ago by WhiteSox2023