israel4ever Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 What's your plan? Go out and sign the top free agents every year? I've heard complaining and oh yeah, a threat ... but not a plan. I don't have a plan formulated, I am not a GM. But, they have to do something differently or we can all "enjoy" a future of never being WS contenders. How about identifying your "holes", and filling them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I don't have a plan formulated, I am not a GM. But, they have to do something differently or we can all "enjoy" a future of never being WS contenders. How about identifying your "holes", and filling them? I've done it a million times on this board, instead of complaining. I've also made my suggestions known to KW via letter, a respectful letter that wasn't full of talk about how cheap they supposedly are. They hear that enough from peanut gallery fans. You can look back through my posts if you wish, I outlined it all right after the season ended, and actually was complimented by many on this site - many here felt what I suggested was realistic, do-able, and would help the team. You don't have any plan for improving the team, except complaining about it? Oh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I just said, here's a plan, identify the "holes", and fill them! (And don't tell me you can't afford to fill the holes, that's b.s.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I just said, here's a plan, identify the "holes", and fill them! (And don't tell me you can't afford to fill the holes, that's b.s.) Huh? What are you asking? And of whom? Seriously ... I don't understand what you're saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Again...here is the 2-step I4E plan... 1. Identify the holes. 2. Fill them! Not difficult to understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 holy s***, not another thread derailed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Again...here is the 2-step I4E plan... 1. Identify the holes. 2. Fill them! Not difficult to understand. Brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 It is brilliant in it's simplicity. That's why (how) the great teams become (stay) great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 15, 2004 Author Share Posted October 15, 2004 Brilliant! BRILLIANT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 It is brilliant in it's simplicity. That's why (how) the great teams become (stay) great! What exactly do you think they're trying to do? Identify the holes and NOT fix them? Isn't it possible your definition of holes (anyone who's not a HOF I guess) is different than theirs? They've identified becoming more athletic overall as a hole. They've identified starting pitching as a hole, to an extent. They've identified lack of speed as a hole. They have all but identified SS as a hole. They have identified the need for another arm in the bullpen as a hole. It is October 15th. They can't do anything until mid-November earliest. I hope they fill the holes they identify before 4/1/05. I suspect they will, based on acquisition of two starting pitchers this summer. It sends a message to those of us who support the team that they're serious. Those actions are interpreted different ways by different people. That's the way it goes sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 f*** Maggs and the asshole agent that he rode out of town on. If he worked in any other profession and pulled the s*** he has, he would have been s***canned and blacklisted. But because he can hit a fastball some idiot is going to offer him a ton of money :rolly I hope the Yankees or Red Sox sign him and end up eating that whole s***ty contract because he can't play. Couldn't agree more. I've been saying this for a while now. I lost total respect for Maggs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefty Of Love Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 My whole point (and please try to refrain from the personal attcks, I have tried to do so.) is that what ownership has been doing for the last 20+ years is not (has not) working. We are no closer to being WS contenders than we were in 1983. Therefore, there is (OBVIOUSLY) something ownership is not doing right, maybe it's time we try another approach. How many more "5-year rebuilding plans" are we supposed to go along with? That being said, your complaint is understandable. The Sox haven't won a WS since 1917. Since JR took over, 3 division titles (4 if you count 94). Not a whole lot of success, but there has been success. I sympathize with your point. The lack of year-in-year-out success is frustrating. But you seem to think that it has been caused by management that is unwillingly to increase payroll and personnel people sitting on their hands, refusing to trade/sign FA's/build the farm system in order to create a winner. Yes, something isn't working, but there are pieces to work off of, there has been past success to use as an example, and the causes you identify that are preventing this team from winning - payroll and s***ty management - are unfounded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 If they put players/team on the field that people want to see (i.e CONTENDERS), people will come out. History has shown that. When? What season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 When? What season? Well.. it was packed for DD night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Didn't we already resign Politte? Actually he signed a new contract that has an option for 2006. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Turning to Boras is baseballese for "I want money now, even if I'm a laughingstock in two years (let alone two weeks)." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 All he told us is he can read the Arlington Herald but not the MLB transactions column. I guess the agate type is beyond his capabilities. Nobody has confirmed the Boras deal, and he totally missed the Polite resigning that occured October 4th. Great journalism. He didn't say when (if) he talked to KW, except to note the plan is 'right now'. The KW quotes could be good if they really are current, it would be helpful were we to know. There is a lot of bulls*** going on with Maggs and those of us who just read the papers and message boards will just have to wait and see what happens, because you can't believe a word of whats being written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 A much better article is in the Sun-Times today, finally putting some substance to the rumors. A real interview with Scott Boras, with dates and quotes. Who knows if the injury is an edema (as the Sox have said) or just another small tear (as Boras said yesterday). Wonder if Magg's will show up in Venezuelan ball? If Maggs would play RF everyday for a week, nobody would need a bunch of MRI's. October 16, 2004 BY ROMAN MODROWSKI Staff Reporter Advertisement Magglio Ordonez is feeling healthy and should be fully recovered from his latest surgical procedure by December, according to his new agent Scott Boras. Boras confirmed Friday he is representing Ordonez, who is an impending free agent and recently fired previous agents Tom Reich and Adam Katz. ''He's fine, going through rehab and feeling great,'' Boras said. ''The doctors have given him a clean bill of health, and they expect him to be back to normal duty by December.'' That contradicts speculation that Ordonez's problematic left knee, which cost him half the season, may not be fully healed by Opening Day in 2005. Some of that speculation was fueled by White Sox general manager Ken Williams, who in September described Ordonez's ailment as a ''rare injury.'' ''He had the first operation during the season, and it was a rather pedestrian medial meniscus tear,'' Boras said. ''Normally, a player comes back from that in 3-4 weeks. ''When Maggs saw another physician, it was discovered he also had a posterior meniscus tear. There were two tears in different spots. The posterior tear was not found in the first surgery, that's why he kept having continual discomfort and problems. That was a minor thing that was fixed.'' Boras said Ordonez traveled to Vienna, Austria in September for the second procedure, partly on the advice of the White Sox medical staff. ''Maggs wanted to go to a doctor he felt comfortable with, and actually the Sox staff recommended he see this doctor,'' Boras said. ''He just went for a second opinion, but during that process, through an MRI, they found what was troubling him. They found the posterior meniscus tear. I've had three knee operations, and this isn't like ACL surgery. Players come back from this in 3-4 weeks.'' Ordonez's previous agents were upset with comments Williams made regarding Ordonez's injury. Skeptics argued the Sox were trying to diminish Ordonez's free-agent value by questioning when he would return. ''My only statement is there are rules in effect under federal law, the HIPAA [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act], where discussions of any athlete's medical condition are prohibited,'' Boras said. ''Obviously, before I've given this information to you, I had to get Maggs' consent. ''Certainly, any employer would have to have that consent from the athlete. I'm not abreast of what occurred [previously with Williams], other than the fact we have reviewed the medical information and spoken to the doctors and got a very, very clear report from them, and that report will be given to all the teams Maggs will talk to.'' Ordonez is not expected to pursue any legal recourse against the White Sox for commenting on his condition. In fact, Boras said the perception that Ordonez ensured his exit from the Sox by hiring an agent regarded as an adversary of White Sox chairman Jerry Reinsdorf is inaccurate. ''I've had a very communicative and open relationship with the White Sox,'' Boras said. ''I have three players [Juan Uribe, Joe Crede and Scott Schoeneweis], and obviously we got things done in an amicable way. I speak to Kenny regularly, and he told me they want to talk about other free-agent players this offseason. I've had a steady dialogue with him. ''My relationship with Jerry is that sometimes deals get done, and sometimes they don't. We've always returned calls when the other called. We've always had a good dialogue. Chicago is a great place to play. My function for my client is to treat every team equally and go from there.'' Boras admitted he hasn't spoken to Reinsdorf since discussions regarding Alex Rodriguez broke down in 2000. He wouldn't comment on whether one club, such as the Cubs, would be any more appealing to Ordonez than any other. ''We're going to go through the normal course of free agency,'' he said. ''That includes 30 major-league teams. We'll listen to every team during that process, and that includes the White Sox.'' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 When? What season? We were drawing 30,000+ when the Sox were contending with the twins THIS year. Once Frank and Mags went down (and out) and we started falling, fans stopped coming out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 We were drawing 30,000+ when the Sox were contending with the twins THIS year. Once Frank and Mags went down (and out) and we started falling, fans stopped coming out. What about last season when they were in first place in the middle of September. They were giving away upper deck tickets for $5 in September against Boston, and couldn't draw 25,000. This season, the Brewers, playing in the cow town of Milwaukee, outdrew the White Sox. 2,000,000 in attendance isn't all that much anymore. The only teams in the AL that draw less than the Sox are their division rivals, which hurts because road teams get a percentage of the gate, and the White Sox therefore wind up playing at least half their away games in half full parks, Tampa Bay and Toronto. The Cubs drew 1.2 million more than the Sox, and their payroll was about $25 million higher. If you took the over 60% increase and added it to the White Sox payroll, it would be approximately $100 million, which would be higher than the Cubs. If you really believe the White Sox attendance would increase over 1 million from current figures if they raised payroll $25-30 million, you really are crazy. The White Sox have the fan support of a middle market team, at best. They have some advantages over the smaller market teams with local t.v. and radio revenue, ect. , not to mention a sweetheart lease deal on their stadium. But until and unless Bridgeport gets more dense in population, the attendance at the park isn't going to go much higher than it is right now, even if they won the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 And who here believes a word of what Borass says? f*** him and all his clients. Sorry, but that man is ruining baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 What about last season when they were in first place in the middle of September. They were giving away upper deck tickets for $5 in September against Boston, and couldn't draw 25,000. This season, the Brewers, playing in the cow town of Milwaukee, outdrew the White Sox. 2,000,000 in attendance isn't all that much anymore. The only teams in the AL that draw less than the Sox are their division rivals, which hurts because road teams get a percentage of the gate, and the White Sox therefore wind up playing at least half their away games in half full parks, Tampa Bay and Toronto. The Cubs drew 1.2 million more than the Sox, and their payroll was about $25 million higher. If you took the over 60% increase and added it to the White Sox payroll, it would be approximately $100 million, which would be higher than the Cubs. If you really believe the White Sox attendance would increase over 1 million from current figures if they raised payroll $25-30 million, you really are crazy. The White Sox have the fan support of a middle market team, at best. They have some advantages over the smaller market teams with local t.v. and radio revenue, ect. , not to mention a sweetheart lease deal on their stadium. But until and unless Bridgeport gets more dense in population, the attendance at the park isn't going to go much higher than it is right now, even if they won the World Series. I understand what you are saying. However, all through the 80's and early 90s the Sox consistently outdrew the Cubs. Why? Because the Sox were consistently better than the Cubs! I am not saying that if you raise the payroll by $25 million, that things will drastically change, but, if you spend the money the right way, i.e. Beltran and Pavano, the 2005 Sox will be at least 15-20 games better than the 2004 version. 15-20 games = playoffs. ("If you build it (a contending team) they (the fans) will come.") On the other hand, if you spend the money the wrong way, i.e. spread it out over 5-7 players, you are doing little to improve the team. Quality is ALWAYS better than quantity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 You neglect to mention a big part of that was the last year of Old Comiskey in 1990 and the newness factor of the new Comiskey, 1991 and 1992. The Cubs became the buzz in 1984 and it hasn't stopped since. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 You neglect to mention a big part of that was the last year of Old Comiskey in 1990 and the newness factor of the new Comiskey, 1991 and 1992. The Cubs became the buzz in 1984 and it hasn't stopped since. True. And I don't think we'll ever outdraw the "northside losers", but we can (should) consistently draw 2 million plus IF (when?) we become consistent contenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 That being said, your complaint is understandable. The Sox haven't won a WS since 1917. Since JR took over, 3 division titles (4 if you count 94). Not a whole lot of success, but there has been success. I sympathize with your point. The lack of year-in-year-out success is frustrating. But you seem to think that it has been caused by management that is unwillingly to increase payroll and personnel people sitting on their hands, refusing to trade/sign FA's/build the farm system in order to create a winner. Yes, something isn't working, but there are pieces to work off of, there has been past success to use as an example, and the causes you identify that are preventing this team from winning - payroll and s***ty management - are unfounded I agree with almost everything you've said, Lefty. I don't hold management accountable for the Sox' failings nearly as much as I hold ownership responsible. KW cannot do what needs to be done by the (artificial) financial restraints that are placed on him. 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.