Jump to content

Sell out streak!


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(YASNY @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:02 AM)
The last big name free agent signed by the Sox: Albert Belle

The last big name free agent signed by the Cubs: Greg Maddux

Greg Maddux was not exactly a hot commodity on the Free Agent market that year, it was basically the Cubs bidding against themselves. I really wouldn't call a 38 year old Greg Maddux a "top tier" free agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(mreye @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:04 AM)
Not the money the Cubs had. You're gonna tell me the Sox had the money to spend when they were pulling 1.6 mil vs the Cubs pulling 2.9 and 3+? I'll guarantee the Sox have spent a much higher percentage of revenue on the club than the Cubs have in the last 10 years.

 

point taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:05 AM)
Greg Maddux was not exactly a hot commodity on the Free Agent market that year, it was basically the Cubs bidding against themselves. I really wouldn't call a 38 year old Greg Maddux a "top tier" free agent.

 

I didn't call him a top tier free agent. I called him a big name free agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:06 AM)
I didn't call him a top tier free agent. I called him a big name free agent.

Well then the Sox signing Sandy Alomar (a possible future HOF) that same offseason could be considered it's equal, could it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:13 AM)
Sandy's a possible future HOF? I think not.

The point is, a big name means nothing if he's not any good. I'm talking about the big name free agents as in the best available players, not just popular names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:15 AM)
The point is, a big name means nothing if he's not any good. I'm talking about the big name free agents as in the best available players, not just popular names.

 

oh man, kalapse, you did say sandy alomar is a possible future HOF... regardless of what you meant, for shame! for shame!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(My Dixie Normus, but so is my gayness @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:17 AM)
I don't care how he does it, but get Carl Crawford in left field at the cell next year.

 

The Cubs could be celebrating 100 years a futility in the near future. I am not sure how that can not motivate them to spend money this off season. Another Sox playoff run would only add more pressure.

 

Carl Crawford is the absolute, #1 target I would go after as well. I don't see the Sox beating out a team like LA, or BOS to get him, but if they could... wow.

Edited by Steve9347
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:15 AM)
The point is, a big name means nothing if he's not any good. I'm talking about the big name free agents as in the best available players, not just popular names.

 

Regardless. The phrase 'big name' was used earlier in the thread and that's what I had in mind when I posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:16 AM)
oh man, kalapse, you did say sandy alomar is a possible future HOF... regardless of what you meant, for shame! for shame!

It was more toungue in cheek than anything else.

 

And when I say "big name" I make the assumption that people understand that would be the top tier guys, the best free agents not has-beens, otherwise it defeats the whole purpose of what I'm saying. Every year a few big name washed up players are signed in free agency, they may be popular players and recognizable names but they're hardly a factor in free agency that's why the phrase "big name" is generally used to describe the best players on the free agent market such as the 2003 offseason when Vlad Guerrero, Miguel Tejada, Bartolo Colon, Andy Pettitte, Javy Lopez and even Jose Guillen were available, they would be considered the "big names" not a 38 year old Maddux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:24 AM)
It was more toungue in cheek than anything else.

 

And when I say "big name" I make the assumption that people understand that would be the top tier guys, the best free agents not has-beens, otherwise it defeats the whole purpose of what I'm saying. Every year a few big name washed up players are signed in free agency, they may be popular players and recognizable names but they're hardly a factor in free agency that's why the phrase "big name" is generally used to describe the best players on the free agent market such as the 2003 offseason when Vlad Guerrero, Miguel Tejada, Bartolo Colon, Andy Pettitte, Javy Lopez and even Jose Guillen were available, they would be considered the "big names" not a 38 year old Maddux.

 

When Maddux signed, wasn't he supposed to be the final piece to the puzzle after the Bartman collapse of the Cubs? He was supposed to be their ticket to the Series. Does that not qualify as a big time signing? Hell, as a supposed number 5 starter, he won 15 games for them that year. He pulled his weight. The rest of the team failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:27 AM)
When Maddux signed, wasn't he supposed to be the final piece to the puzzle after the Bartman collapse of the Cubs? He was supposed to be their ticket to the Series. Does that not qualify as a big time signing? Hell, as a supposed number 5 starter, he won 15 games for them that year. He pulled his weight. The rest of the team failed.

He was brought in as a number 5 starter and was only persued by a few teams with the Cubs way overpaying to bring him back. The front office may have hyped it as a big move but at the time of the signing, it was no more of an impact move than the Sox bringing in Pierzynski 2 offseasons ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:30 AM)
He was brought in as a number 5 starter and was only persued by a few teams with the Cubs way overpaying to bring him back. The front office may have hyped it as a big move but at the time of the signing, it was no more of an impact move than the Sox bringing in Pierzynski 2 offseasons ago.

 

Let's just agree to disagree. There's been enough nits picked here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(EVIL MISQUOTER @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 04:32 PM)
Let's just agree to disagree. There's been enough tits picked here.

Fixed that for you. :lol:

 

I see what you both are saying.

 

Back to the topic - AMAZING streak - it's awesome to even be talking about this. Let's get that 17th game sold out too, so we can have a sell out streak into next season!! THAT would be awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:33 AM)
Back to the topic - AMAZING streak - it's awesome to even be talking about this. Let's get that 17th game sold out too, so we can have a sell out streak into next season!! THAT would be awesome.

 

I'm sure it will. There's almost a full week between now and then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(iamshack @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:41 AM)
If we were to average 38,000 for our remaining 24 home games, we would end up with about 2,977,000 in attendance. Don't think if this is possible though, because of comp tickets.

 

Isn't the max around 39,000? With a close race coming up, and including SRO tickets, it may be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 10:41 AM)
i couldn't have asked for the fans to support this team better after the world championship season. it just proves who the smarter fans are... we held out for a world series championship, and Cub fans still sell out that stadium every game/every year, giving management no reason to win.

 

 

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Aug 11, 2006 -> 11:01 AM)
Oh BS, the sox always had the money. I love Kenny's ways of trading for players and getting other teams to pay their contracts, BUT, it was always BS that the Sox didn't spend, and now that they ARE spending, we be happy.

 

You are actually wrong on this, and the answer is in one of your previous posts. Because of the Sox much lower attendance at times, they have never had the money to spend like the Cubs. Plus when you add in their much higher outside revenues from things such as merchandise and advertsing, it isn't even close. I know the old JR haters used to always sing this song, but the Sox have always spent everything that comes in. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 straight sellouts, 38 total on the season. Here is where it gets interesting though as there are tickets for all four of the up coming games at home against KC... Do your think Sox fans, put your money where your mouths are. You say you go when we win, well we just swept the best team in baseball...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 13, 2006 -> 11:06 PM)
18 straight sellouts, 38 total on the season. Here is where it gets interesting though as there are tickets for all four of the up coming games at home against KC... Do your think Sox fans, put your money where your mouths are. You say you go when we win, well we just swept the best team in baseball...

 

I thought I heard that the 3 night caps are sold out. I think Thursday was the one that was going to be the hard sell, being an afternoon game in the middle of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Aug 13, 2006 -> 10:23 PM)
I thought I heard that the 3 night caps are sold out. I think Thursday was the one that was going to be the hard sell, being an afternoon game in the middle of the week.

 

Hawk kept mentioning that tickets were available for all of the games, but I just looked at Monday, and you can't even get a single ticket for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...