I want Ozzie and KW gone.

[iamshack]

Don't worry. You both are not the only ones and I'm not just talking about myself from what I've noticed over time. I'll leave it at that.

Well, if the other mods/admins decide to suspend me, then I will deal with the consequences. But that is for them to decide, not you, Gerry, or you, Greg.

 

Secondly, simply because insults are couched in friendly language does not make them non-actionable. We are all big boys here. The meaning and intent is every bit or more important than the language used.

[greg775]

With all due respect, you should get a warning letter as I did.

But I like your posts and your passion.

 

Cool post, Pumpkin. You rock. Good points, sir.

[bigruss]

I very much grasp the concept, Russ.

 

Where we are failing to have a meeting of the minds, so to speak, is because you are insinuating that there are no downsides to having a franchise built on developing the majority of your talent from within.

 

First of all, Smoak was the Rangers 1b of the future. My guess is that they would have preferred to keep him around as opposed to having to deal him for a 3 month rental, even if it was for the great Cliff Lee. They have no chance of resigning Lee, and so unless he helps deliver an World Series title this season, they will have traded their 1b of the future for 3 a chance that didn't pan out. Now if their system was as loaded with players able to help their MLB team as much as you contend it is, one would venture to guess that they could have enticed either the Mariners or some other team to trade them an ace without having to trade their 1b of the future. Shockingly, they were forced to do the same thing we would have had to do - open up a hole somewhere else and try to fill it with it someone who is probably not going to get the job done adequately. Whether they have some remaining depth to pull off another trade to replace Smoak seems pretty irrelevant, since they do not have the money to take on anymore payroll. They will probably have to go with Davis for the remainder of the year or acquire someone like Mike Lowell because their organization is bankrupt.

 

Secondly, trying to develop your own talent has many pitfalls, from prospects that cause you to let other producing veterans walk away because the prospect was blocked, to prospects that perform one year and then never again as the league adjusts to them and you are forced to sit through years of below replacement value performance in the name of being "patient," to trades you didn't make because that prospect was just too untouchable to move.

 

With the rate of attrition as high as it is, I would rather just trade 95% of them for players that give you some sort of performance certainty than to mess around with trying to guess which prospects will pan out and not pan out.

 

I'm not claiming, however, that having a good farm system is a bad thing. What I am claiming is that there are a lot of things this organization does very well - far better than other organizations do. And while the farm system is not one of them, I'm not so sure that I would rather we be worse off at the other things we do well in the name of improving our farm system.

First off, I would just like to say that the conversation we have had today/tonight has been outstanding IMO, and is alot better than how this thread started to go (not pointing at you J4L, just the few posts made in reaction to yours). I do enjoy your posts Iamshack as you bring a unique perspective and insight into the conversation.

 

That said, I had pointed out earlier that the biggest problem with the Sox is that they dont draft/develop well enough. I could care less if the prospects are brought up to contribute to the team or if they are used as trade bait as long as the team is in first place. The problem I have is that the Sox dont draft/develop well and now were in a position where making a move for a Fielder/Dunn would be extremely beneficial for this year. The problem is, the Sox would be handcuffed financially next year because they would be trading the only prospects that could have an impact in a starting role next year in a deal for Fielder/Dunn. If they had the depth in the farm system, they could make a move for one of those guys and still have enough pieces left int he minors to fill holes on the team next year. The Rangers could still easily trade for anothr big piece if they wanted to, since Lee only cost them another 1.5 mil, and they still have a ton of prospects left. They have the flexibility to do so, the Sox do not.

 

I am also not trying to label the Rangers as a team to emulate, because I am still skeptical of their team. There is no doubt though that they are young, talented, and have the ability to add to that team and make it a force in the playoffs.

[SoxAce]

Well, if the other mods/admins decide to suspend me, then I will deal with the consequences. But that is for them to decide, not you, Gerry, or you, Greg.

 

Secondly, simply because insults are couched in friendly language does not make them non-actionable. We are all big boys here. The meaning and intent is every bit or more important than the language used.

 

It isn't just you, and your one of the few posters I like Mark. Just alittle thing I've generally seen for a while that has really irked myself (and I'll just speak for myself this time) or little snark comments that of course will go unnoticed with a poster with some power. I've seen far too many times a guy gets alittle power on a message board, and clearly it gets to their head even if they don't realize it.

 

BTW I just don't like that second paragraph from you man. Reminds me of that incident with Milk's friendly "couched" comment (in green tile no less) to Jim not too long ago in a thread. You don't deserve a letter/warning though, just like J4L didn't deserve one.

Edited July 26, 2010 by J.Reedfan8

[iamshack]

First off, I would just like to say that the conversation we have had today/tonight has been outstanding IMO, and is alot better than how this thread started to go (not pointing at you J4L, just the few posts made in reaction to yours). I do enjoy your posts Iamshack as you bring a unique perspective and insight into the conversation.

 

That said, I had pointed out earlier that the biggest problem with the Sox is that they dont draft/develop well enough. I could care less if the prospects are brought up to contribute to the team or if they are used as trade bait as long as the team is in first place. The problem I have is that the Sox dont draft/develop well and now were in a position where making a move for a Fielder/Dunn would be extremely beneficial for this year. The problem is, the Sox would be handcuffed financially next year because they would be trading the only prospects that could have an impact in a starting role next year in a deal for Fielder/Dunn. If they had the depth in the farm system, they could make a move for one of those guys and still have enough pieces left int he minors to fill holes on the team next year. The Rangers could still easily trade for anothr big piece if they wanted to, since Lee only cost them another 1.5 mil, and they still have a ton of prospects left. They have the flexibility to do so, the Sox do not.

 

I am also not trying to label the Rangers as a team to emulate, because I am still skeptical of their team. There is no doubt though that they are young, talented, and have the ability to add to that team and make it a force in the playoffs.

Russ, they cannot add another player of any value unless the other team eats all the salary. Now maybe that's because they sunk all their money into international scouting and the draft. Maybe that's because they've dished out millions in signing bonuses that we have not. Maybe that's because they've failed to develop or acquire any significant young SP despite all these wonderful arms of theirs we have heard they have in their system.

 

I'm just pointing out, I think there is a LOT of money wasted on trying to maintain a solid system and even more opportunity costs involved which ultimately can hurt your big league club a lot.

 

I'm not sure the argument is as cut and dry and many here would like to believe.

 

[lostfan]

There aren't different rules for mods and admins. FYI.

[iamshack]

It isn't just you, and your one of the few posters I like Mark. Just alittle thing I've generally seen for a while that has really irked myself (and I'll just speak for myself this time) or little snark comments that of course will go unnoticed with a poster with some power. I've seen far too many times a guy gets alittle power on a message board, and clearly it gets to their head even if they don't realize it.

 

BTW I just don't like that second paragraph from you man. Reminds me of that incident with Milk's friendly "couched" comment (in green tile no less) to Jim not too long ago in a thread. You don't deserve a letter/warning though, just like J4L didn't deserve one.

Trust me, and let me make this clear for everyone here that is sees some inequity between the regular posters and the mods/admins and others deemed to be "privileged." Everyone ultimately gets dealt with, whether it is seen publicly or not.

[caulfield12]

I'm not knocking what they've done or do. I'm just saying this is a business and sometimes when things need to be done, they just need to be. Dealing one or both of them to help build for the future 3 years ago in my eyes was a smart play. I thought we were entering a period where we were old, had nothing worldy in the pipes coming up, and that those guys be dealt at their peaks was a smart move. Keepign them I felt only would have us finishing a series of 3rd or fourth place finishes and then being left empty handed when their time was up.

 

Thats basically what we'll see. If the goal here is to put together teams that can win the mediocre AL central then bow out to the East or West, fine. If the goal is to win, then sometimes you need to restructure things. In the world of baseball, one of the best ways to do that is by spending and developing. We spend moderately well but we have to because we don't develop. We won't ever be the Yankees but we could and should be the Angels. Who have a deep farm and then spend 100 mil. If we do that - then we wouldn't need to worry about having to sell fan favorites off because theyre the only way we can rebuild.

 

Thats all. Nothing against mark or paulie. I love them both just found it in better judgement to have sold high on them.

 

Yes, but hindsight is always 20/20. It's like saying we should have drafted Porcello and Garza instead of Poreda, McCulloch and Broadway, etc.

 

How many baseball teams in your memory have traded their two most identifiable players while still in their prime years?

 

How can you be so certain the net in terms of prospects would have mitigated the losses in revenue? You're assuming that someone would have taken Konerko's contract three years ago. There was no deal out there like that...the time to have been making this argument was right after the World Series championship, when Konerko was presenting the ball to JR. Goodbye, Paulie? Were you advocating that move in October, 2005?

 

Same thing with Buehrle. You take away all those memories from Sox fans, the no-hitters, everything that he represents to this franchise, it's okay to overpay for that...and you might end up with the players the Twins got from the Mets from Johan Santana, perhaps the best pitcher in baseball, certainly much more "valuable" than Buehrle and yet what do they have to show for that now? JJ Hardy?

 

If you want to continue this line of reasoning, we shouldn't have given Contreras a contract extension (certainly not that length), and we should have traded Crede and Jenks while they still were at close to their prime values.

 

The problem is the same one in the stock market, it's very very difficult to part with an asset that's performing at a high level for prospects that may or may not pan out in the future...not only that, but you destroy the competitiveness of the team, you're no better than the Oakland A's or Florida Marlins, dumping your best players as soon as they get too expensive and alienating your fanbase in the process.

 

Look at a team that's done as you have suggested, the Cleveland Indians. There are other factors here in play, but that team was king of the city until Dolan started to tear it apart in 2001 and 2002....what was their string of consecutive sell-outs at Jacobs Field? What is their attendance now? Sure, we can all talk about Santana's potential, but how many sure things have they acquired over the last half decade that haven't panned out. LaPorta? Josh Barfield? Andy Marte? The list goes on and on. They signed players like Hafner and Peralta to long term deals unwisely and then traded away their best defender, F. Gutierrez, and got what back exactly? For all their manuevering, they got stuck with Kerry Wood (trying to maintain some level of competitiveness) and now might even end up trading Carmona.

 

So no thanks to going that route.

[Pumpkin Escobar]

I know Dick Allen will argue this one (the fact that we have less money than he thinks to spend), but the priority for the White Sox has always been producing a winning or competitive major league team on a year-by-year basis.

 

Because of that, a higher percentage of available resources have gone into the major league team than with other organizations.

 

I could cite Chris Young, Chris Carter, Ryan Sweeney, Frank Francisco, Gio Gonzalez, Brandon Allen, Faustino De Los Santos, Carter, Brandon McCarthy, etc. It's not like our system has been totally bereft of prospects, it's simply that we have prioritized the short term over the long term.

 

If KW doesn't make a move in the next weeks, it will be the first time which this has happened in recent memory. So perhaps this is all a case of premature evaluation, until we see who KW ends up with. If you're a Twins fan, aren't you even MORE upset that they haven't acquired Lee, Haren or Oswalt, because, when healthy, they have a potentially dominant offense, yes? And they have the prospects to make those moves, yet they are holding back. Perhaps they want to keep Ramos in case they decide to make Mauer a 3B or DH to save all the wear and tear on his body. Maybe they look out and see the lack of athleticism at the corners and feel they need to hold onto Hicks and Revere.

 

This has always been the biggest problem...we haven't had the luxury of going with a rebuild like we did in the late 80's and late 90's. Every organization goes through this, except for teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Cardinals, Twins, etc. Heck, look how long it has taken for the Braves to get back to the top of their division after struggling for the last 2-3 seasons.

 

The problem is that there's perhaps no fanbase in baseball that's as "winning percentage" driven as the White Sox. Maybe everyone is right, we should have rebuilt after 2007. Except our division being winnable each season is also a curse. It prevents KW from going into that full rebuilding mode 100%, knowing that if the attendance slides, his resources to work with will correspondingly slide, and then he's left with a self-fulfilling prophecy of taking 3-5 years to turn the organization around completely. I'm not sure he has the patience to do that, he's still too competitive, but you're THEORETICALLY seeing his balancing of 2010 with future needs and I still wouldn't be shocked if he did nothing at all and hoped for a return in performance/health from all those guys like Mitchell, Thompson, Morel, Phegley, etc.

 

There's no doubt that teams like the Astros held onto their stars too long, each year feeling they had one last run in them.

 

The thing is, if you go back to 1990 or 1993 or pretty much any time period over the last 20 years, the White Sox will end up with one of the 3-7 best winning percentages compared to all the other teams in baseball, and the three others will always be the Red Sox, Yankees and Braves.

 

A healthy Carlos Quentin, the Gordon Beckham of most of 2009 and a dangerous Mark Teahen instead of Kotsay takes care of 90% of our problems. Still, we're relying heavily on both Garcia and Hudson down the stretch, just as Minnesota is doing with Duensing/Slowey/Baker.

 

 

I didn't jump into this thread to pile on the Haren thing from today. Or to fire kenny or ozzie. I was more or less here to say when the seaosn started I was waiting for the disaster that was on paper to perform and get them headed for unemployment. Outside of a few things, we turned it around and can compete. Great. I somewhat applaud both but it's also fools gold. That win streak may get us into the playoffs but we have proven that we aren't a 25-5 type team against the AL. We are smoke and mirrors until we improve. Losing Peavy made it more of an uphill battle but I'm onboard for it if we can improve. Seeing Haren et dealt and hearing the nonstop banter from other teams about us not having the guys to get it done or how our mlb players need to be involved is a bad thing though. Our system is paper thin, vastly unproven and frankly very disappointing as a fan.

 

To say those things don't matter as some have is silly and misinformed. How you draft, sign, develop is extremely important. Someone pointed out the Angels and Dodgers. Fine. Dodgers had a lot of prospects and some failed but the thing is those guys are still young and most of their stars are homegrown. Meaning, cheaper in every sense. Contract wise because theyre under control, they havent cost the team in terms of losing guys to get them, etc. The Angels have owned the 2000's for the most part. They had 3 division titles in their history and have 5 in the last 7 years and a world series? I'd say that farm helped out. So whoever suggested those two needs to reevaluate things.

 

Sure you can win without it as we did. We are living proof. But lets also look at problems we've encountered doing it our way. Trouble landing guys in trades or affording guys in FA comes to mind and thats what our team is built on. Why? Because we deal our chips in mass quantities, don't replace them in full right away, then acquire contracts or players needing bigger contracts. So we hit FA and become unable to add (like this offseason) because our budget is maxed out on guys who are not considered "elite".

 

Anyways, I just sort of jumped in because in 3 years we will be in this situation again, in some fashion, I am sure. We will have either dealt away everything and gotten a guy like Fielder who spurned us in FA and then we failed to draft compensation picks well. Or we'll have Dunn or Fielder locked up but unable to afford something like Danks. Maybe we do something none of us see coming. Maybe it works out perfect for us. Regardless, starts now and by not having done the things we should've been doing all along, like carrying even a half-decent farm, we may miss the boat acquiring someone and still sitting with our thumbs up our rear next season.

 

What I wanted to stress was if we do not change how we do things then this organization will continue to be the winning percentage team as you put it. Full of 84 win seasons and 2nd or 3rd place finishes where we hung in the whole season and didn't improve the right way. No one wants to sit through a 90-100 loss season. I applaud this organization for minimizing that over the last 25 years but sometimes its a necessary evil, especially when we don't draft or develop well.

 

I like how we try to rebuild on the fly with Rios and Peavy but then call it what it is. We are out to be competitive, not bad but certainly not great. If thats the case, just let us know.

[caulfield12]

I hear what you're saying.

 

I wonder how many would support this kind of a move from KW and JR, though. If they wrote out a letter to shareholders right now.

 

 

"Dear Friends,

 

We really don't have any more money to spend. Our big moves for the offseason were made when we acquired Jake and Alex Rios last year. Unfortunately, the team didn't play very well the first two months, our revenues across the board are down or flat, so we don't want to overextend ourselves again like we did last year, with nothing to show for it.

 

After many discussions, we feel the Twins are the team to beat, and they have the luxury of making trades and taking on more salary because they have a much stronger farm system, more quality depth and a larger income stream than we do.

 

So we're going to cross our fingers with Freddy Garcia and Daniel Hudson and hope they can pull us through. That's where we're at.

 

We made a BIG mistake not bringing back Jim Thome while simultaneously thinking Mark Kotsay could repeat his 2009 success offensively. But we don't want to compound the problem now by trading away our future young stars like Gordon Beckham, Dayan Viciedo, Daniel Hudson and Tyler Flowers for a 2 month run at the pennant when doing so will put as at a huge competitive disadvantage moving forward into 2011 and 2012.

 

Yes, we STILL should have gone after the best available bat when we saw that Vladimir Guerrero was on the market for a reasonable price. We messed up and take full responsibility.

 

You're just going to have to trust us now that Jake Peavy will be back at 100% next spring, that Dayan, Tyler, Daniel and Gordon are all future American League All-Stars and that our future is a very bright one, especially if you factor in our injured (but possibly prodigious) talent from the 2009 draft and the addition of Mr. Chris Sale.

 

I believe that Kenny and Ozzie are the right guys to place my confidence in, and I hope you'll agree with me, too, by sending in your 2010 playoff deposits as well as 2011 season ticket renewals. Thanks in advance for your support.

 

JR

 

 

 

[Pumpkin Escobar]

Yes, but hindsight is always 20/20. It's like saying we should have drafted Porcello and Garza instead of Poreda, McCulloch and Broadway, etc.

 

How many baseball teams in your memory have traded their two most identifiable players while still in their prime years?

 

How can you be so certain the net in terms of prospects would have mitigated the losses in revenue? You're assuming that someone would have taken Konerko's contract three years ago. There was no deal out there like that...the time to have been making this argument was right after the World Series championship, when Konerko was presenting the ball to JR. Goodbye, Paulie? Were you advocating that move in October, 2005?

 

Same thing with Buehrle. You take away all those memories from Sox fans, the no-hitters, everything that he represents to this franchise, it's okay to overpay for that...and you might end up with the players the Twins got from the Mets from Johan Santana, perhaps the best pitcher in baseball, certainly much more "valuable" than Buehrle and yet what do they have to show for that now? JJ Hardy?

 

If you want to continue this line of reasoning, we shouldn't have given Contreras a contract extension (certainly not that length), and we should have traded Crede and Jenks while they still were at close to their prime values.

 

The problem is the same one in the stock market, it's very very difficult to part with an asset that's performing at a high level for prospects that may or may not pan out in the future...not only that, but you destroy the competitiveness of the team, you're no better than the Oakland A's or Florida Marlins, dumping your best players as soon as they get too expensive and alienating your fanbase in the process.

 

Look at a team that's done as you have suggested, the Cleveland Indians. There are other factors here in play, but that team was king of the city until Dolan started to tear it apart in 2001 and 2002....what was their string of consecutive sell-outs at Jacobs Field? What is their attendance now? Sure, we can all talk about Santana's potential, but how many sure things have they acquired over the last half decade that haven't panned out. LaPorta? Josh Barfield? Andy Marte? The list goes on and on. They signed players like Hafner and Peralta to long term deals unwisely and then traded away their best defender, F. Gutierrez, and got what back exactly? For all their manuevering, they got stuck with Kerry Wood (trying to maintain some level of competitiveness) and now might even end up trading Carmona.

 

So no thanks to going that route.

 

Saw the Twins do it with Johan. The Rangers with Arod. Cleveland with CC. It happens every year.

 

And yes - hindsight is 20/20. I agree with you. The thing is, we are a big market team. We spend the big bucks with the best of them minus the yanks, saux, mets. The Yanks and Saux spend money on their famr though. Thats how they land big guys in deals, develop guys like Cano or Hughes.

 

It's not missing on our guy in the draft which is annoying. It's when you do it in spite of the poor scouting or information. Poreda was a pretty good arm but 99% of the baseball world knew Porcello was better. Signability was the concern. I get how thats a tough thing to explain to fans and I'm sure lots would be upset if we selected someone only to go to college. However, it's not a all-in gamble. It was a high school arm with huge upside, if you didnt get him, most HS arms aren't hitting the majors in 1 year so the next year you get that selection back and can draft a more advanced guy in the slot to compensate. But at least try and make the moves that could propel your franchise. Stop making the same dead arm, 1 plus pitch arm, picks.

 

And like I said in my previous post before I got to see yours. I am not anti-paulie or Buehrle. There is just a point where you address your team. Our point was 2006. We won in 2005. We had a "better" team in 2006 by adding Thome. The hitting was off th charts. We took 3rd. Took 3rd with 90 wins. To me, that says sure we can go all in and add some guys to try and win again, which we didn't do. Or we should've looked around, at that time, saw a team like Minnesota boasting the best arm in the game and a kid who came up and blew the doors off people to go along with their young homegrown cornerstone and MVP of 2006. And that Mauer guy.

 

You had Detroit who no one expected to do what they did. You had Cleveland who was young and talented also. Why not take your guys and improve. No one knows what we could've gotten for Paulie, but it sure wouldnt have bothered me if we made a deal as much as it bothers me that every year we enter the season knowing what we have isn't enough to win the world series yet we run it out there and try to make arguments supporting them.

 

Memories? So you'd rather have the No hitters than the World Series memories? Maybe gold if your sport then because the goal here isn't individual achievement. Buehrle is great. I love all he has done but I'm sorry if dealing him would've gotten us a piece that helps us win one or two world seires, multiple divisions, then ya I may value the trade over a perfect game in a season where we barely win 75 games. Just me I guess, thought that was the goal.

 

I did think we should deal Jenks. Obviously you did not. I got into numerous arguemnts over Jenks and his declining stuff, weight issues, and elbow screws, etc. Said we should've dealt him while his value was up because closers are replaceable and his splits were going bad. Now look, years later and most want him out. He is the worst closer in the AL with a minimum of X saves or innings I saw on comcast the other night. His value is minimal to where it was all because we wanted to do what you said above.

 

It is the stock market in many cases. Thats how you need to view it sometimes if you cant do the basic things right. We don't do the basics right so then you kind of need to do the sell high/buy low crap that we do.

 

I did mention the indians. They were the Kings and 90% of that team from the 90's was home grown btw. Sure things didnt pan out as hafner was a flash in the pan, sizemore is never healthy, lee and sabathia are gone. The big difference between them and us about 30 mill a year in payroll spending. I know theyve hit 80 or 90 mil a couple times but mainly they probably average 50-60's. We could easily do what they do get the Santana's, for casey blake mind you, and then still spend 100 mil. We just don't. LaPorta looks pretty solid. Marte is a bust. Barfield was nothing special. Don't forget sizemore, Lee, and brandon phillips came from a firesale move- two of which could've been cornerstones had they prolonged success as a team. All 3 are all-stars.

[Pumpkin Escobar]

I hear what you're saying.

 

I wonder how many would support this kind of a move from KW and JR, though. If they wrote out a letter to shareholders right now.

 

 

"Dear Friends,

 

We really don't have any more money to spend. Our big moves for the offseason were made when we acquired Jake and Alex Rios last year. Unfortunately, the team didn't play very well the first two months, our revenues across the board are down or flat, so we don't want to overextend ourselves again like we did last year, with nothing to show for it.

 

After many discussions, we feel the Twins are the team to beat, and they have the luxury of making trades and taking on more salary because they have a much stronger farm system, more quality depth and a larger income stream than we do.

 

So we're going to cross our fingers with Freddy Garcia and Daniel Hudson and hope they can pull us through. That's where we're at.

 

We made a BIG mistake not bringing back Jim Thome while simultaneously thinking Mark Kotsay could repeat his 2009 success offensively. But we don't want to compound the problem now by trading away our future young stars like Gordon Beckham, Dayan Viciedo, Daniel Hudson and Tyler Flowers for a 2 month run at the pennant when doing so will put as at a huge competitive disadvantage moving forward into 2011 and 2012.

 

Yes, we STILL should have gone after the best available bat when we saw that Vladimir Guerrero was on the market for a reasonable price. We messed up and take full responsibility.

 

You're just going to have to trust us now that Jake Peavy will be back at 100% next spring, that Dayan, Tyler, Daniel and Gordon are all future American League All-Stars and that our future is a very bright one, especially if you factor in our injured (but possibly prodigious) talent from the 2009 draft and the addition of Mr. Chris Sale.

 

I believe that Kenny and Ozzie are the right guys to place my confidence in, and I hope you'll agree with me, too, by sending in your 2010 playoff deposits as well as 2011 season ticket renewals. Thanks in advance for your support.

 

JR

 

Unfortunately what you just said is the sad truth.

 

However, I am ok with trading the guys we have on the farm. The sytem is weak as it is, so empty the cupboard. I just want to see them learn to improve it by scouting, drafting, dealing for, and getting much more involved internationally. What's down there now with a few exceptions is pretty much useless to our big league squad so if you can deal them for a prince fielder, you do it. Problem is, everyone knows its dogs*** down there and are using it to try and leverage Beckham. Kenny is making the right play by not giving in because we shouldnt deal GB, shouldn't be asked to, and eventually someone should cave and if they don't, he sees the elephant in the room that needs to be addressed. That is if he is going to be able to do his job well. The elephant being improving the scouting and farm.

[jenksycat]

hahaha, I thought this was a thread from like May or something that just go bumped. Hilariously awful

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

The problem here is the things you are saying can be applied to anything. What if we just dealt with the fact our system is weak and spent more money in drafts or internationally. Maybe developing a better scouting department for starters. Or drafting guys who normally fall due to their contract size or signability concerns instead of selecting these overly projectable average arms every year. Only time we take risks are for these stupid toolsy outfielders. Apply that sense to some pitchers from time to time and we may end up an ace in the system for a change and not having to deal for them. Something like a guy like Porcello falling past us to the Tigers comes to mind immediately. That ties into another subject which is the whole white sox vs boras nonsense.

 

See Chris Sale. Fact is the Sox currently are trying to fix the farm system stemming from the whole Wilder fiasco.There were teams who passed on him because of signability issues. The Sox capitalized on that by promising the kid he'd get a shot at the majors this year.

 

Now I've seen the Red Sox used as a great example of a team doing it the right way. I've seen no one bring up the fact that the Red Sox are the 2nd richest baseball franchise behind the Yankees. The Sox come in 2nd in a 2 team baseball town. Do the math. The Sox priority is having a team to compete every year under the KW regime. That means a high major league payroll. The reason for that strategy is if the Sox don't put out a winning product there will be no butts in the seats. The fans who clamor for a great minor league system ,no matter their "intelligence " as a fan, are outnumbered by perhaps 5000-1 by actual people who pay to see a winning team. So the minors suffer because of that. We can't overpay for everything which is exactly what the Red Sox do.

 

Our young or semi-young talented players include Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Ramirez ,Thornton (core players), Jenks ,Santos, Viciedo,and Lillibridge have all come by means other than the draft. The first 6 in that group are 2 very good starting pitchers, a near MVP, a SS who is pretty damn good and an All Star reliever and another reliever who made 2 All Star teams and was huge ( no pun intended) in bringing a title to this team. Consider the talent we gave up to get those players .Really not much at all in terms of major league talent. What KW has done to me is quite impressive. I will never underestimate a World Series win or competing nearly every year for a division title for a franchise with a piss poor history.

 

As far as the 2nd bolded part goes, you will drive yourself insane thinking that way. As Caulfield said "hindsight is 20/20". Albert Pujols was drafted in the 13th round. Every team in the majors passed on him 12/13 times. It's a crap shoot. Sure you can improve your odds by putting more cash into it but "can't miss" prospects miss a lot more often than they succeed. High draft choices help and the Sox just haven't been in a position to draft very high thanks to having one of the most successful franchises in baseball in the last 10 years or so. Maybe the Sox should be the model other teams ( other than the Red Sox and Yankees) look to for building a franchise instead of the other way around.

Edited July 26, 2010 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[caulfield12]

7. Detroit Tigers as the desire for pitching everywhere else. Over the last week, Detroit lost its right fielder (Magglio Ordonez(notes)), third baseman (Brandon Inge(notes)) and second baseman (Carlos Guillen(notes)) to the disabled list. While GM Dave Dombrowski referenced by name pitchers Jacob Turner and Andy Oliver(notes) – the Tigers’ two best prospects – when talking about youth he didn’t want to mortgage, he didn’t call them untouchable.

 

So the prospect of trading for Hart, or Toronto’s Jose Bautista(notes), or any other bat to help Miguel Cabrera(notes) win the triple crown – and the Tigers win the AL Central – isn’t far-fetched. Dombrowski certainly isn’t against dealing young talent. Jair Jurrjens(notes) is thriving in Atlanta (for Edgar Renteria(notes) – d’oh.) Cameron Maybin(notes) and Andrew Miller(notes) are still in the minor leagues in Florida (while Cabrera has been the best hitter in baseball). And though they don’t have the makeup of a team that could steal a division, the Tigers are still just two games behind the …

 

8. Chicago White Sox and their tenuous grip on the AL Central lead. The White Sox miss Peavy. They’re rotating a group of replacement-level hitters at DH. Bobby Jenks(notes), lost his job as closer. And somehow, they’re still in first place.

 

Getting Fielder, Adam Dunn(notes) or someone else who can step into that DH slot and provide the middle-of-the-order bat the White Sox have missed all season would transform them from even-money-at-best to distinct favorite. Minnesota, while on the periphery of big trade talks, doesn’t seem inclined to make a blockbuster move, and the Tigers are injuring themselves out of October. Both of which make White Sox GM Kenny Williams all the more inclined to strike, his desire for a deal …

 

9. Similar to Ned Colletti’s with the Los Angeles Dodgers, the only difference being Williams’ payroll flexibility and Colletti’s fiduciary handcuffs.

 

Jeff Passan, yahoo sports

[gatnom]

See Chris Sale. Fact is the Sox currently are trying to fix the farm system stemming from the whole Wilder fiasco.There were teams who passed on him because of signability issues. The Sox capitalized on that by promising the kid he'd get a shot at the majors this year.

 

They made one really good pick, and then went on to be mediocre for the rest of the draft. There is some risk in rushing Sale to the majors as well. How long can Dave Wilder be the scapegoat for all the Sox' woes? Fact of the matter is that the organization has to move on from that whole fiasco and stop shooting themselves in the foot by being too squeamish to actually try to improve their farm system.

 

Now I've seen the Red Sox used as a great example of a team doing it the right way. I've seen no one bring up the fact that the Red Sox are the 2nd richest baseball franchise behind the Yankees. The Sox come in 2nd in a 2 team baseball town. Do the math. The Sox priority is having a team to compete every year under the KW regime. That means a high major league payroll. The reason for that strategy is if the Sox don't put out a winning product there will be no butts in the seats. The fans who clamor for a great minor league system ,no matter their "intelligence " as a fan, are outnumbered by perhaps 5000-1 by actual people who pay to see a winning team. So the minors suffer because of that. We can't overpay for everything which is exactly what the Red Sox do.

 

The problem is that their approach in spending on the major league club hasn't worked. Yeah, they've had their best decade in the history of the franchise, but since that burst of spending after 2005, what has happened to their payroll every year? Their strategy of investing heavily in the major league club already has them retreating towards the smaller side of $100 million, with realistic projections of them receding even further. The less money that they have to spend, the less they will win. The less they win, the less money they have to spend. Now, I'm not saying the priority of the franchise shouldn't be the major league club, that is something I can agree on. However, they really need to invest a little money at least on some prospects. Right now, KW has backed himself into a corner. He can deal his only three prospects with value in an effort to fill a hole that could have been filled, very very cheaply I may add, in the off season for a chance to win a mediocre division with his best pitcher on the DL, or he can decide that he wants to compete next year too meaning that he has to keep his three prospects who have value and hope to god that they can fill in the gaps left by Freddy, Paulie, and AJ.

 

Our young or semi-young talented players include Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Ramirez ,Thornton (core players), Jenks ,Santos, Viciedo,and Lillibridge have all come by means other than the draft. The first 6 in that group are 2 very good starting pitchers, a near MVP, a SS who is pretty damn good and an All Star reliever and another reliever who made 2 All Star teams and was huge ( no pun intended) in bringing a title to this team. Consider the talent we gave up to get those players .Really not much at all in terms of major league talent. What KW has done to me is quite impressive. I will never underestimate a World Series win or competing nearly every year for a division title for a franchise with a piss poor history.

 

There is no doubt KW has made some fantastic trades an acquisitions over the past few years. Unfortunately, those good, young players are all just about due for a pay day. John Danks has shown absolutely nothing since dumping Boras that he wants anything less than big money, and I know I can't be the only poster on this site who thinks we may not be able to afford what he wants us to give him. Jenks hasn't been very good at all this season and is very clearly overpaid. Certainly, he is no all-star. I may be speaking heresy here, but I don't trust Santos going forward. I mean, this is a guy who's pitched only 1 year of major league ball before this season. I'm not entirely sure how big of a pay day Alexei is due, but if he manages to get the gold glove somehow, I can see him using that to secure himself a big one. I don't have the slightest clue why you included Lillibridge in this list...

 

I don't think there's anybody on here who doubts KW's ability to pull off some great trades. The problem is that he has completely neglected the farm system for way too long. There really is no excuse for how bad our prospects are; I don't care how many injuries there have been. Even if all Kenny does is package off his prospects for more proven talent, at least he would have something to work with instead of having to face the dilemma of mortgaging the next season just so he can put his team in contention for one year. And, let's not forget he has made some less than good moves, too. Is there anybody on here who thinks the Linebrink contract is good? How about the idea to trade for a non-tender candidate in Mark Teahen and then sign him to a long term deal? I bet he wishes he could redo the Swisher trades. Speaking of Swisher, how about the center fielders he's thrown out there? What about him playing second-fiddle, presumably at least, to Ozzie in setting up this debacle of a rotating DH, causing this whole issue with trading our young talent in the first place? Does anybody remember him offering tons of money to Hunter and Fukudome? On the whole, I agree KW has been more good than bad, but for our particular team I believe you have to invest more in your farm system. As you mention above, we aren't the Red Sox. We can't go out and buy a bunch of free agents to fill our holes, which is why it is all the more important to have good prospects on the farm.

 

As far as the 2nd bolded part goes, you will drive yourself insane thinking that way. As Caulfield said "hindsight is 20/20". Albert Pujols was drafted in the 13th round. Every team in the majors passed on him 12/13 times. It's a crap shoot. Sure you can improve your odds by putting more cash into it but "can't miss" prospects miss a lot more often than they succeed. High draft choices help and the Sox just haven't been in a position to draft very high thanks to having one of the most successful franchises in baseball in the last 10 years or so. Maybe the Sox should be the model other teams ( other than the Red Sox and Yankees) look to for building a franchise instead of the other way around.

 

Like who? I don't see why you wouldn't try to model your franchise around the best run in the mlb.

[caulfield12]

Because it's not realistic to model ourselves against the Yankees, Phillies, Dodgers, Cubs, Red Sox, Giants or Mets.

 

We're always going to be a "middle tier" team in terms of MLB, with somewhat lower attendance but #8-12 revenues because of our market, higher ticket prices (concessions/parking/souvenirs), broadcasting rights, WGN, advertising revenue, etc.

 

Realistically, then, you want to look at the Cardinals, Angels (some would clearly stick them in the large market group because of the LA market and due to Moreno) and Twins as the "gold standard," with a nod to the Braves as well.

 

In my mind, we're on that same level with the Brewers (despite their attendance, they're still looking to sell high on Hart and Fielder), Rockies, Tigers, Braves, Rangers, Astros, Mariners and possibly the DBacks and the Padres at the bottom of that rung.

 

If you look at the grouping, the White Sox and Braves have clearly done the best in terms of sustaining success this decade.

[hogan873]

I too thought this was an old thread that got bumped up when I first saw it. And reading through it, I noticed that there was plenty of name-calling and ***. So, it was just like a thread from May.

 

I'm frustrated after this road trip. I've noticed that when this team is good, they are good. But when they are bad, they're really bad. I can't see why Ozzie won't just admit that they need another bat. I'm not sure this team has any business being in first place as they are right now. And unless they shake off this bad road trip and get back to winning, they won't be in first place much longer. If Minnesota and Detroit make a move or two and the Sox stand pat, there's going to many an angry person, myself included. I hope that doesn't happen. And if KW makes a move to get another bat, I hope we see a lot less of Kotsay.

[Greg Hibbard]

The first six years that KW was general manager he did not post a losing record.

 

As for Ozzie, when you put up a .530 managerial record over 1100 games you are doing something right.

[tonyho7476]

Personally, I love Kenny and Ozzie and I think they do the best they can, with the limits put on them by Reinsdorf.

[Chisoxfn]

This is a lot better than I could ever say it. This organization is far too comfortable resting on its laurels hoping that problems work themselves out. This team didn’t have to be put in the situation where losing one piece of the pitching puzzle virtually eliminates them from the trading market. A market that they vowed to search when their doomed to failure DH experiment, inevitably failed. If we lose this division, it’s a because of problems of our own choosing.

Let me tell you, the Angels wouldn't look near as good if they haven't had to play in an even s***tier division the last 6 to 7 years. The NL West has been bad for a good chunk of the last 7 years. The NL Central has had some really weak years, even the NL East has as well.

 

Quite frankly, outside of the East there hasn't been a division that is continuously stacked with teams and the AL Central has at least had 2 headed races most years.

[Chisoxfn]

I do not agree with the base of this thread and period. This is all over the Angels getting Haren? Lets not act as if they didn't take on a good size contract and a pitcher who is having one of his worse seasons in a long time and gave up some decent talent.

 

The White Sox should not have been acquiring Haren anyway, adding another large pitching contract would really put the Sox in a s***ty position for the future.

[southsider2k5]

There aren't different rules for mods and admins. FYI.

 

This is true. Honestly people would be surprised to know some of the actions we have taken over the years. The biggest thing is that we do not making stuff public. People learn about suspensions because the people who were suspended talk about it. We also don't talk about warnings or the like. It is just a policy to respect the people involved here by not airing their dirty laundry in public. It is the way we have always done things, and we think it works well.

[Chisoxfn]

Geeze, people. Grow the f*** up. Can't we just leave this to talking baseball and leave the petty bulls*** at the door?

 

And just an FYI, for those that seem to think there is a double standard here, there is one. Long term posters get slack. They don't always get suspended for stuff a newbie would get suspended for and they get long suspensions instead of bannings when they do go ape-s***.

 

Why, because I know whose been here a long time and I (as can the team of moderators) can recognize posters who have a history of adding a lot to this board. I remember this place when it was a small White Sox forum and I remember how many of our regular members were posting even than.

 

If you are a good poster, you are going to get special treatment and you've earned it.

 

And while some may not realize it, Mods have been suspended and even banned in the past. But we don't go making posts about who was suspended and who wasn't, etc, etc. That stuff stays private.

 

And to be 10000% clear, there is no double-standard or special treatment between a mod and a regular poster. In fact, we tend to be harder on mods/admins.

[NorthSideSox72]

I didn't see this said, but may have missed it in a very long thread.

 

2010 draft is too early to really evaluate, but 2008 and 2009 were both very good. Part of the reason 2009 may not seem great right now is injuries - all of the top three players drafted in 2009 (Mitchell, Thompson, Phegley) are not playing due to injury or illness. That will take a HUGE bite out of ANY system, having your 1-year-back draft lose its top 3 picks.

 

But of course, KW's style is to trade away most prospects of value. That combined with some bad drafts in the few years before 2008, and voila, you have a weak system.

 

If 2010's draft turns out well, and if the Sox don't trade away a bunch of the few good prospects left, this system will probably start to look at lot better next season. For now, though, they are near the bottom.