KW Employment Poll

[NorthSideSox72]

Should be interesting to see KW go from ultra-aggressive to ultra-patient or at least try to do so. Does he have the personality for a rebuild? That's a question needing an answer.

In a way, he is already rebuilding. I mean, look at the rookies who have jumped into significant roles on the team last season and this offseason - Fields, Owens, Richar, Quentin, Ramirez... that's 5 guys who were rookies in 2007 or will be in 2008, that are likely to be on the 25-man roster (and all but Ramirez are likely to start). Then there are Floyd and Danks in the rotation, and a still-young bullpen (aside from Linebrink). This team, since Opening Day 2007, has gotten younger at LF, CF, 2B, 3B, 2 SP's, and most of the bullpen.

 

[sircaffey]

In a way, he is already rebuilding. I mean, look at the rookies who have jumped into significant roles on the team last season and this offseason - Fields, Owens, Richar, Quentin, Ramirez... that's 5 guys who were rookies in 2007 or will be in 2008, that are likely to be on the 25-man roster (and all but Ramirez are likely to start). Then there are Floyd and Danks in the rotation, and a still-young bullpen (aside from Linebrink). This team, since Opening Day 2007, has gotten younger at LF, CF, 2B, 3B, 2 SP's, and most of the bullpen.

 

In a way, but he's still "competing" in a way too. It takes a lot of patience to go through a pure rebuilding stage, something we might be headed for.

[NorthSideSox72]

In a way, but he's still "competing" in a way too. It takes a lot of patience to go through a pure rebuilding stage, something we might be headed for.

If by a "pure" rebuilding phase you mean trading away most or all of your established talent above 28 years old and giving up the idea of being a title contender... then you won't see it as long as KW is GM. For good or bad, he just won't ever do that, I don't think.

 

[sircaffey]

If by a "pure" rebuilding phase you mean trading away most or all of your established talent above 28 years old and giving up the idea of being a title contender... then you won't see it as long as KW is GM. For good or bad, he just won't ever do that, I don't think.

 

That's my thinking as well which is why I voted for KW to be fired.

[NorthSideSox72]

That's my thinking as well which is why I voted for KW to be fired.

I think that you misunderstand the way Sox fandom works from the business perspective of the Sox. If the Sox throw in the towel and spend 2 or 3 years outside of contention (like they were in 2007), their attendance takes a gigantic hit - and so does their revenue. Thus making it difficult it not impossible to compete. The fact that the Sox have had a high end payroll the last few years, after being near league bottom for most of the recent decades, is directly related to having KW as GM. He understands you have to have a team in the hunt most years, or else the team will have no payroll to work with. That's his philosophy, and the attendance and salary figures indicate how successful he has been.

 

If you do a massive rebuild right now, and spend a couple years with KC-like records, after 2007 was already so awful... and the team is screwed for a long time to come. Because of the nature of Sox fans, and because they play in a very tough division, the rebuilding in place that KW is doing is the only way to go that makes any sense.

 

[sircaffey]

I think that you misunderstand the way Sox fandom works from the business perspective of the Sox. If the Sox throw in the towel and spend 2 or 3 years outside of contention (like they were in 2007), their attendance takes a gigantic hit - and so does their revenue. Thus making it difficult it not impossible to compete. The fact that the Sox have had a high end payroll the last few years, after being near league bottom for most of the recent decades, is directly related to having KW as GM. He understands you have to have a team in the hunt most years, or else the team will have no payroll to work with. That's his philosophy, and the attendance and salary figures indicate how successful he has been.

 

If you do a massive rebuild right now, and spend a couple years with KC-like records, after 2007 was already so awful... and the team is screwed for a long time to come. Because of the nature of Sox fans, and because they play in a very tough division, the rebuilding in place that KW is doing is the only way to go that makes any sense.

 

No, I don't misunderstand. The World Series effect is going to wear off soon, and we are going to be right back where we were in KW first 4 seasons (low attendance) unless he catches lightning in a bottle again. This team can not compete with Detroit and Cleveland in the next 5 seasons the way it is set up now, imo. Rebuilding will drop attendance, but so with consistent mediocrity.

 

KW's method does not keep attendance high. Even after 2000 when we led the Majors in wins, we were 26th in attendance in 2001. Even when we "competed" in 2003 we were 21st in attendance. The only reason why attendance has been high the past 2 seasons is because of the World Series effect. Once that is gone, and that's coming shortly, we will be back to pre-2005 figures. In fact, I may argue that now is the best time to rebuild due to the WS effect still having some impact. Playoff appearances is the only thing that can keep the the Sox attendance figures level, imo. KW has managed to make the playoffs once in 7 years. Not very competitive if you ask me.

Edited December 27, 2007 by sircaffey

[NorthSideSox72]

No, I don't misunderstand. The World Series effect is going to wear off soon, and we are going to be right back where we were in KW first 4 seasons (low attendance) unless he catches lightning in a bottle again. This team can not compete with Detroit and Cleveland in the next 5 seasons the way it is set up now, imo. Rebuilding will drop attendance, but so with consistent mediocrity.

 

KW's method does not keep attendance high. Even after 2000 when we led the Majors in wins, we were 26th in attendance in 2001. Even when we "competed" in 2003 we were 21st in attendance. The only reason why attendance has been high the past 2 seasons is because of the World Series effect. Once that is gone, and that's coming shortly, we will be back to pre-2005 figures. Playoff appearances is the only thing that can keep the the Sox attendance figures level, imo. KW has managed to make the playoffs once in 7 years. Not very competitive if you ask me.

Even though some folks here don't see a difference between 70 wins and last place, and 85 or 90 wins and staying in the hunt until near the end... some fans do. So you can bet that having a team like the one he is trying to set up here will draw more crowds than a 5th place team would. Yes, there is of course a lingering effect of 2005. But if the team is awful in 2008, it will lose that effect a lot faster than if its good but not quite good enough (which is what I think is likely).

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Because of the nature of Sox fans,

 

What does that mean?

[Dick Allen]

Even though some folks here don't see a difference between 70 wins and last place, and 85 or 90 wins and staying in the hunt until near the end... some fans do. So you can bet that having a team like the one he is trying to set up here will draw more crowds than a 5th place team would. Yes, there is of course a lingering effect of 2005. But if the team is awful in 2008, it will lose that effect a lot faster than if its good but not quite good enough (which is what I think is likely).

Nothing will turn Sox fans off more than losing and going out on a limb and offering someone $75 million, getting rejected, and then saying you can't buy something for $1 when you only have $.50 when asked what you're going to do with that money. I understand and maybe even believe the White Sox planned to go out on a limb and try to spend money to make money, something it appears they have not done in the past, but its not going to fly with the casual fan.

[NorthSideSox72]

What does that mean?

It means look at the attendance figures over the years. Sox fans show up when the team wins, and they don't when they are losing. Most teams have some amount of this going on, though with the Sox it seems more extreme. Certainly its the near-opposite of the Cubs, who draw almost the same no matter what garbage they put on the field.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Nothing will turn Sox fans off more than losing and going out on a limb and offering someone $75 million, getting rejected, and then saying you can't buy something for $1 when you only have $.50 when asked what you're going to do with that money. I understand and maybe even believe the White Sox planned to go out on a limb and try to spend money to make money, something it appears they have not done in the past, but its not going to fly with the casual fan.

Nah. Most Sox fans don't hinge their opinions on KW's speeches like we do here, or about what deals were rumored or not. Most fans could care less about that drivel - they just care about the product on the field, the ballpark experience... the important stuff. What will hurt Sox attendance in 2008 is the 2007 results, as well as how 2008 goes on the field.

 

Soxtalk is not a very representative sample of Sox fandom - people here are much deeper into all the rumors, analysis, players on the market, etc.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Nah. Most Sox fans don't hinge their opinions on KW's speeches like we do here, or about what deals were rumored or not. Most fans could care less about that drivel - they just care about the product on the field, the ballpark experience... the important stuff. What will hurt Sox attendance in 2008 is the 2007 results, as well as how 2008 goes on the field.

 

Soxtalk is not a very representative sample of Sox fandom - people here are much deeper into all the rumors, analysis, players on the market, etc.

 

Absolutely. Podsednik is God at the ballpark and, uh, not here.

[sircaffey]

Even though some folks here don't see a difference between 70 wins and last place, and 85 or 90 wins and staying in the hunt until near the end... some fans do. So you can bet that having a team like the one he is trying to set up here will draw more crowds than a 5th place team would. Yes, there is of course a lingering effect of 2005. But if the team is awful in 2008, it will lose that effect a lot faster than if its good but not quite good enough (which is what I think is likely).

 

I guess you have a ton more faith in next year's team than I do. You must see them as a 90+ win team if you think they are "not quite good enough."

 

There is no statistical data to back this up, but I would say that 3 seasons of either last place or 4th place finishes coupled with 5-6 years of 2nd place or 1st place finishes would bring in a lot more revenue than a consistent 8-9 years of 3rd place finishes. What you do now effects you greatly in the future. If you rebuild now, what you lose today, you gain tomorrow. (low attendance figures during rebuild, higher figures post-rebuild + major playoff appearance revenue).

 

I guess it all depends on how you view the current make-up of the team. If you think the current team can make the playoffs in the near future then stay the course. If not, I believe you abandon ship.

[sircaffey]

It means look at the attendance figures over the years. Sox fans show up when the team wins, and they don't when they are losing. Most teams have some amount of this going on, though with the Sox it seems more extreme. Certainly its the near-opposite of the Cubs, who draw almost the same no matter what garbage they put on the field.

 

I'm asking more because I'm curious to see the numbers, but what are basing that off of? From the numbers, I've got (2001-2007), it appears that it takes an extreme event like the World Series to change the figures. 2001 attendance was putrid after a 95 win 2000 season.

[DBAHO]

And I think after the World Series win, even if we have another 70 win season or 2, our attendances will still be decent, better than they were before 2005.

 

But obviously the best way to put fans in seats is to win. Just look at the Blackhawks for example (although there are other factors in play too).

[Dick Allen]

Evidently Mark Gonzalez doesn't agree with KW's analysis of the current roster. Here's his prediction from the Tribune's list of predictions from its writers in 2008

 

 

A demanding schedule that features 15 of their first 22 games against American League postseason contenders Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota and the New York Yankees will put heat on the franchise to get off to a fast start, and avoid the slow start that crippled them in 2007. An aging roster will force Ken Williams to make one of his most controversial trades in his tenure as general manager. Otherwise, they could be looking at a 100-loss season.

 

—Mark Gonzales, White Sox reporter

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Evidently Mark Gonzalez doesn't agree with KW's analysis of the current roster. Here's his prediction from the Tribune's list of predictions from its writers in 2008

A demanding schedule that features 15 of their first 22 games against American League postseason contenders Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota and the New York Yankees will put heat on the franchise to get off to a fast start, and avoid the slow start that crippled them in 2007. An aging roster will force Ken Williams to make one of his most controversial trades in his tenure as general manager. Otherwise, they could be looking at a 100-loss season.

 

—Mark Gonzales, White Sox reporter

So let me get this straight... a 90-loss team that improves at, so far, 4 or 5 slots - and falls back at 1 (JG)... and who had significant injury problems in 2007 at 3B, C, LF and CF... becomes a 100-loss team in 2008? What a joke.

 

This is no division winning team, but Mr. Gonzalez needs to get a clue.

 

[sircaffey]

So let me get this straight... a 90-loss team that improves at, so far, 4 or 5 slots - and falls back at 1 (JG)... and who had significant injury problems in 2007 at 3B, C, LF and CF... becomes a 100-loss team in 2008? What a joke.

 

This is no division winning team, but Mr. Gonzalez needs to get a clue.

 

Let's be honest here. This team could go either way. There are a whole host of question marks (Quentin, Richar, Owens, Floyd, Danks, the rest of the bullpen). None of them are good bets to be upgrades over what we had last year. They could, but it's just as likely that they won't be. Right now, I see two upgrades at SS and SU, and one large downgrade at SP. I don't find it insane for people to think this could be either a 90 win team or 100 loss team. This team is that volatile to me.

[NorthSideSox72]

Let's be honest here. This team could go either way. There are a whole host of question marks (Quentin, Richar, Owens, Floyd, Danks, the rest of the bullpen). None of them are good bets to be upgrades over what we had last year. They could, but it's just as likely that they won't be. Right now, I see two upgrades at SS and SU, and one large downgrade at SP. I don't find it insane for people to think this could be either a 90 win team or 100 loss team. This team is that volatile to me.

It COULD be a 100 loss team or a 100 win team - but neither are anywhere near likely.

 

LF looks like it improved quite a bit (Quentin over Pods), CF is a little better (Ramirez/Owens over Erstad or just Ownes), Linebrink adds a big boost to the pen, 2B has a big question mark but should be at least as good as what Iguchi was doing in the first half of 2007, and O-Cab is a farily large upgrade over Uribe at SS. That's 5 positions. Not to mention that Fields and Owens should improve in their second years, and the potential that Ramirez could be more than a platoon guy in CF and 2B. Plus the team still has Uribe and Crede to trade.

 

All that, and one negative (admittedly, a big one) - Jon Garland being replaced by Danks/Floyd. Unless something else is done later this offseason, that's a big downgrade, probably.

 

This team is significantly improved. But as I said, its still no division woinner, because DET and CLE look amazing.

 

[sircaffey]

It COULD be a 100 loss team or a 100 win team - but neither are anywhere near likely.

 

LF looks like it improved quite a bit (Quentin over Pods), CF is a little better (Ramirez/Owens over Erstad or just Ownes), Linebrink adds a big boost to the pen, 2B has a big question mark but should be at least as good as what Iguchi was doing in the first half of 2007, and O-Cab is a farily large upgrade over Uribe at SS. That's 5 positions. Not to mention that Fields and Owens should improve in their second years, and the potential that Ramirez could be more than a platoon guy in CF and 2B. Plus the team still has Uribe and Crede to trade.

 

All that, and one negative (admittedly, a big one) - Jon Garland being replaced by Danks/Floyd. Unless something else is done later this offseason, that's a big downgrade, probably.

 

This team is significantly improved. But as I said, its still no division woinner, because DET and CLE look amazing.

 

Your "improvements" are merely based on potential and not performance. I'm not saying they won't be improvements, but don't react so emphatically when someone thinks they won't be. Quentin could remain injury prone, Richar could continue to hit like he currently is, Fields could experience the proverbial sophomore slump (he doesn't even have a position yet). Not to mention this team's depth is non-existent. Plus, the potential holes in the rotation could negate any improvement to the regular lineup. We've seen what just one hole can do to a team (2001-2004). Double or triple that effect. It could be absolutely crippling.

Edited December 30, 2007 by sircaffey

[NorthSideSox72]

Your "improvements" are merely based on potential and not performance. I'm not saying they won't be improvements, but don't react so emphatically when someone thinks they won't be. Quentin could remain injury prone, Richar could continue to hit like he currently is, Fields could experience the proverbial sophomore slump (he doesn't even have a position yet). Not to mention this team's depth is non-existent. Plus, the potential holes in the rotation could negate any improvement to the regular lineup. We've seen what just one hole can do to a team (2001-2004). Double or triple that effect. It could be absolutely crippling.

You are using potential to state what could go wrong, and you are right. But then you said the "improvements" are based on potential. Well, which way is it? There is no knowing for sure what this team will do. I agree that its very volatile. And the offseason isn't over yet - I don't think we have the full 25 man roster at this point. But looking at the "potential" of the players at each position and who they replaced, I think its pretty clear the new guys out-potential the old guys in all those cases.

 

[sircaffey]

You are using potential to state what could go wrong, and you are right. But then you said the "improvements" are based on potential. Well, which way is it? There is no knowing for sure what this team will do. I agree that its very volatile. And the offseason isn't over yet - I don't think we have the full 25 man roster at this point. But looking at the "potential" of the players at each position and who they replaced, I think its pretty clear the new guys out-potential the old guys in all those cases.

 

Right. I'm just saying potential is not the same as improvement. Just don't right in pen when you list the improvements on this club.

[NorthSideSox72]

Right. I'm just saying potential is not the same as improvement. Just don't right in pen when you list the improvements on this club.

Improvement is there - the potential of the newer players is pretty clearly higher than who they replaced, in my view. But you never know what they will actually do. I never said otherwise. You can't write any of it in pen anyway - its all guesswork.

 

[whitesoxfan101]

The results of this poll are very sad and makes me wonder if our fanbase is as smart as I thought.

[Dick Allen]

Improvement is there - the potential of the newer players is pretty clearly higher than who they replaced, in my view. But you never know what they will actually do. I never said otherwise. You can't write any of it in pen anyway - its all guesswork.

You would also have to take into consideration the possible "improvement" of teams they will face 19 times. Detroit, Cleveland, KC, and perhaps even Minnesota could say they have also "improved."