israel4ever Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 ESPN Rumor Central is reporting that Anaheim is looking to deal Jarrod Washburn or Ramon Ortiz, possibly both to offset their signings. The two teams that are being mentioned for both are the Padres and Orioles. Why is it that the Sox are nowhere to be found by either one of their names. Ortiz is making 3.5 Million next year and 5.0 the following year. What the hell is wrong with Kenny and Jerry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Well I just don't know how we could even get anything done w/ them...We'd need to dump salary to make a deal work....Therefore it'd be Konerko, Mags, or Jose....and they have their OF, 1B, and SS spots filled. We won't trade for either of the pitchers w/ prospects when we're trying to get rid of salary. We're just kind of stuck here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2003 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 ESPN Rumor Central is reporting that Anaheim is looking to deal Jarrod Washburn or Ramon Ortiz, possibly both to offset their signings. The two teams that are being mentioned for both are the Padres and Orioles. Why is it that the Sox are nowhere to be found by either one of their names. Ortiz is making 3.5 Million next year and 5.0 the following year. What the hell is wrong with Kenny and Jerry? I have pretty much conceded that we are not gonna make ANY significant additons to this team...All we gotta do is hope 5 or 6 guys have break out years and we can somehow take advantage of an AWFUL division... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 We have a team in a major market city, I don't understand this dumping salary s***. If there is a problem with funds with JR, then he should sell. I see Anaheim, Baltimore, Boston, the Cubs, Kansas City, Detroit all spending money, we live in Chicago. We shouldn't be dumping we should be adding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 We have a team in a major market city, I don't understand this dumping salary s***. If there is a problem with funds with JR, then he should sell. I see Anaheim, Baltimore, Boston, the Cubs, Kansas City, Detroit all spending money, we live in Chicago. We shouldn't be dumping we should be adding. They aren't dumping salary, they are increasing it $7 million over last year and are currently $4 million over that. We have been over this a hundred times. How many times will it take until you get it?? Read this thread if you need it spelled out...... Reinsdorf Sucks (Not Really) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsoxs1 Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 and they have their OF, 1B, and SS spots filled. Who is their 1st baseman. I don't think they have anybody. They were going after Palmiro before he signed with the O's. I think they are intrested in PK but the price is to high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Erstad is going to be moved to 1b for them from what I have heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 If they are moving Washburn and/or Ortiz to "offset signings", then they aren't going to take on PK and his $8 million salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 If they are moving Washburn and/or Ortiz to "offset signings", then they aren't going to take on PK and his $8 million salary. More likely they would try and dump Erstad or Percival on us as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Rector Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 More likely they would try and dump Erstad or Percival on us as well. You write as if that's necessarily a bad thing. Erstad is still one of the best defensive center fielders around even if his batting has declined and Percival's not too bad either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 You write as if that's necessarily a bad thing. Erstad is still one of the best defensive center fielders around even if his batting has declined and Percival's not too bad either. The bad thing is that we'd take on an extra 4 to 5 mill in payroll if we do that deal. Then we'd know sum1 else like MAggs would be traded as well, which isn't a bad thing IF we get a really good return for him which doesn't seem likely now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Rector Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 We have a team in a major market city, I don't understand this dumping salary s***. If there is a problem with funds with JR, then he should sell. I see Anaheim, Baltimore, Boston, the Cubs, Kansas City, Detroit all spending money, we live in Chicago. We shouldn't be dumping we should be adding. The size of the team payroll is dependent on the attendance, not the size of the city that the team plays in. If the 2003 attendance was say 2.5 Mil, then your complaints about the size of the payroll would be valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 We have a team in a major market city, I don't understand this dumping salary s***. If there is a problem with funds with JR, then he should sell. I see Anaheim, Baltimore, Boston, the Cubs, Kansas City, Detroit all spending money, we live in Chicago. We shouldn't be dumping we should be adding. Did u see Detroit's payroll and record last year? And what u'd thought they'd stand pat and do nothin like us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FUCKREINSDORF Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 We have been over this a hundred times. How many times will it take until you get it?? Read this thread if you need it spelled out...... Reinsdorf Sucks AMEN!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 You write as if that's necessarily a bad thing. Erstad is still one of the best defensive center fielders around even if his batting has declined and Percival's not too bad either. I would definately take Percival or Erstad for Konerko. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wong & Owens Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 The size of the team payroll is dependent on the attendance, not the size of the city that the team plays in. If the 2003 attendance was say 2.5 Mil, then your complaints about the size of the payroll would be valid. Er, not exactly. I.E.--Braves, Mets and Rangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 AMEN!!!! You obviously didn't read the thread, did you? Within that thread, there was information on how just adding payroll is NOT the answer. You may not like Reinsdorf, but all these people just demanding he dramatically increase payroll just don't get it! In case you don't want to go back and actually read the thread..... The Marlins haven't spent any more than the Sox either. In fact, their payroll of $49 million was less than the Sox last year. The Sox even had a higher payroll than the Marlins in 1997. The complaint was the Sox don't have a payroll level like the teams that spend $100 million. My reply was that they don't have the revenue those teams do either. The very fact that the Marlins and Angels have won the last two World Series with payrolls in the $50 million range means that "payroll" is not necessarily the answer. In fact, when the Sox more than doubled their payroll from 2000 to 2001 and it didn't do squat for them. The Orioles have outspent the Sox by $133.2 million over the last 5 years. That's $26 million a season and they have been much worse than the Sox. I get sick of people just expecting payroll to be increased by millions of dollars because that will make us win. History has shown us that is not necessarily true. It is how you spend your money, combined with luck, timing and circumstance that will give you a winner - unless you are the Yankees. In their case, their ridiculous payroll guarantees they will have a chance to compete at the highest level, it doesn't guarantee them wins, as we have seen the past few years. The Marlins payroll was lower than the Sox in BOTH 1997 and 2003. In fact, from 1997 through 2003, the White Sox have spent $77.8 million more in payroll than the Marlins, yet the Marlins have two WS Championships. Not one year have the Marlins outspent the Sox in that time. Doesn't sound like a higher payroll is the only answer to me. Florida Marlins Payroll History Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Don't waste your time Rex, some people just hear what they want to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Don't waste your time Rex, some people just hear what they want to hear. Good point...... some will never get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Rex, it's never been a case of how much they spend, rather how they spend it. That '99 draft is now killing us, because it's 4 1/2 years later and we took all those pitchers and have gotten precious little production from them. Scouting ... player development ... and adding key free agents when needed. That's how to do it. And we have failed to an extent on the first two in particular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 Rex, it's never been a case of how much they spend, rather how they spend it. That '99 draft is now killing us, because it's 4 1/2 years later and we took all those pitchers and have gotten precious little production from them. Scouting ... player development ... and adding key free agents when needed. That's how to do it. And we have failed to an extent on the first two in particular. Failed miserably is more like it Jim... Hindsight is 20/20.. but boy o boy.. talk about taking one in the shorts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fattyguy78 Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 I look at it like this...yes we are adding 7 million over last years salary but that is only enough to cover the raises and arbitration from last year i.e. Thomas 4 million-6million...Buerle 345,000-3.5 million...Loaiza 500,000-4million, not to mention Lee, Schoenweis, Garland and others that got raises...he is raising the salary, just not enough to get any real players, i mean, yes we have some money for losing bartolo/gordon, but it's not enough to do anything of substance. I think the point of this conversation was not to put Reinsdorf down and say that he is a cheap ass, it's just from my point of view, like it or not we need to have an average payroll, of at least 70 million to contend, if we had that payroll we would win the central every year...I think we all just want him to raise the payroll to a reasonable level, and don't give me the marlins/ angels bulls*** cause everyone knows that those a fluke things that only happen once every ten years or so...in the case 3 times....but even a blind squirrel can find a nut every once in a while... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 It's unfortunate that things have worked out that way so far, because at one point, the Sox '99 draft looked to be a great one. That just goes to show you how inexact a science scouting and player development is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 I look at it like this...yes we are adding 7 million over last years salary but that is only enough to cover the raises and arbitration from last year i.e. Thomas 4 million-6million...Buerle 345,000-3.5 million...Loaiza 500,000-4million, not to mention Lee, Schoenweis, Garland and others that got raises...he is raising the salary, just not enough to get any real players, i mean, yes we have some money for losing bartolo/gordon, but it's not enough to do anything of substance. I think the point of this conversation was not to put Reinsdorf down and say that he is a cheap ass, it's just from my point of view, like it or not we need to have an average payroll, of at least 70 million to contend, if we had that payroll we would win the central every year...I think we all just want him to raise the payroll to a reasonable level, and don't give me the marlins/ angels bulls*** cause everyone knows that those a fluke things that only happen once every ten years or so...in the case 3 times....but even a blind squirrel can find a nut every once in a while... A higher payroll would be realistic if the revenues were there. I just don't buy the fact that JR should have to drastically increase payroll to cover for all the bad contracts the Sox have. It is not a perfect world and if mistakes are made, they can't always be corrected the easy way, by throwing money at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted January 13, 2004 Share Posted January 13, 2004 It's unfortunate that things have worked out that way so far, because at one point, the Sox '99 draft looked to be a great one. That just goes to show you how inexact a science scouting and player development is. This is very true, but it does get frustrating to see how few top picks ever pan out for the Sox, especially pitching-wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.