I want Ozzie and KW gone.

[chw42]

Which is no different from what Detroit has done, but they've spent even MORE money than the White Sox since 2006...significantly more.

 

The difference being they lost in the World Series and also being edged out by Minnesota in Game 163.

 

Minnesota has just had a better organizational philosophy over that entire time, and they've stayed true to it. Unfortunately, as with the Oakland A's and Atlanta Braves, that system only gets them so far before they run into a brick wall.

 

And I wouldn't even say the 2006 team underachieved, I just think the wear and tear of all those pitches came down hard on the starting rotation and that 2005 team overachieved to such a degree that it was impossible to sustain that level of success...combined with Minnesota and Detroit both getting good quickly and rebounding.

 

You can cite 10-12 teams every season that overspend and get poor results, and the White Sox probably wouldn't come up as one of the worst offenders for any season except for 2007. We only have to look miles to the north for a team in a much more dire financial position.

 

And the Angels were basically gift-wrapped the AL West for most of this decade as the M's teams of the early 00's fell apart/got old, and the A's went through a series of financial, stadium and personnel issues...then you have Texas, which always had the hitting but not enough pitching.

 

At least there's been quite a bit of competition between the White Sox, Twins, Indians and Tigers for much of this decade. The same can't be said of the AL West, and that's why all of those Angels teams since 2002 came up short.

 

Comparing our situation to the Tigers and the AL West doesn't say much about this team constantly underachieving. Underachieving was this team's forte from 2001-2004 and then from 2006-2009. The team did underachieve in 2006. That team was built to win 95+ games. They wet the bed, they had a near double digit lead on Minnesota in July. You're not supposed to lose the division by 6 games when that happens.

 

The problem with this organization is that people make way too many excuses. Citing that this organization used to be bad isn't an excuse for the current one. When you win a World Series and you raise your payroll towards the top of the league, you are expected to win on a consistent basis and win division championships, if not world championships. Kenny seems to have a similar type of killer instinct, but the thing is, the true potential of these past teams is not coming out.

[Chisoxfn]

It depends on the scouts you ask, for Poreda couldve been looked at as a potential ace in some eyes, and in others a potential lights out closer.

 

Skaggs has potential, but is still at A ball. Comparable to Dex, but probably better. Ive never been impressed my Saunders and would put him around Richard's value, especially when you consider you will have to pay around 6 million for him next year.

 

And when you consider the contracts/injuries of Peavey/Haren I would give the edge to Haren and the package given up for him as a better trade for the Angels than peavey for the Sox.

Poreda was a 1 pitch pitcher who was out of college. Skaggs was a top prep arm who fell due to signability concerns more than concerns over upside.

[Chisoxfn]

That package is a lot better than what the Angels gave up. Hudson projects to be about the same pitcher as Saunders this year and he has room to improve. Sale is kind of similar to Skaggs, but Santos is a lot better than Rodriguez. In fact, I think the advantages that the Sox prospects overshadow the fact that the Angels also gave up an extra guy in Corbin.

And I think I did point out that the Sox package, if they had offered that, would have been a bit stronger than the Angels offer. I also said I wouldn't make the trade as I have no interest in adding another starter with a hefty salary.

 

[Chi Town Sox]

hes pisst and jealous because angels got Haren.

 

Haren has openly stated that he wanted to stay on the West Coast (he was born and raised there) - who is to say (not directed at you) that that did not have any part in it?

 

[Greg Hibbard]

Other than 2005 and maybe 2008, this team has UNDERACHIEVED every single year that he has been the manager given the amount of money we've put into the team and the talent that was on it.

 

When you've had $95-$110 million payrolls these past 5 years, you expect to win every year. Kenny's right, 2007 and 2009 were embarrassments.

 

In 2004, when the team payroll was $65 million (15th of 30 teams in MLB), we lost Ordonez for 2/3rds of the season, and Frank Thomas only played 75 games. I'm sorry...but winning 83 games was a freaking miracle in retrospect.

 

In 2006, winning 90 games put us short, but I'm not sure I'd consider it a categorical disappointment.

 

In 2009, our payroll was 12th in MLB, fwiw.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Greg Hibbard

[chw42]

In 2004, when the team payroll was $65 million (15th of 30 teams in MLB), we lost Ordonez for 2/3rds of the season, and Frank Thomas only played 75 games. I'm sorry...but winning 83 games was a freaking miracle in retrospect.

 

In 2006, winning 90 games put us short, but I'm not sure I'd consider it a categorical disappointment.

 

In 2009, our payroll was 12th in MLB, fwiw.

 

You're supposed to win more than 79 games with a $90 something million payroll.

 

That 04 team still had an incredible offense without Maggs and Frank. Rowand had a near career year, as did Uribe. Along with Freddy in that pitching staff, they should have been better than an 83 win team.

[Greg Hibbard]

You're supposed to win more than 79 games with a $90 something million payroll.

 

That 04 team still had an incredible offense without Maggs and Frank. Rowand had a near career year, as did Uribe. Along with Freddy in that pitching staff, they should have been better than an 83 win team.

 

You just said given the talent, money and therein implied expectations, and then you cite two guys that had "career years"...

 

If Frank and Mags are healthy for even most of the year, we probably win that division.

 

I just don't know how you can put 2004 on Ozzie, but to each his own.

[Pumpkin Escobar]

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.

 

I've already said hindsight is 20/20. I understand that. It's just funny to me that there is no "talent" involved in these teams who make the pick. You're absolutely right for 13 rounds people passed on Pujols, but someone, in that organization, did see him and got the Cards to take him. We rarely see anything pan out from our farm after the relatively easy first few rounds. I say relatively easy because it's not that easy, never is, but when you have 20 publications, networks, and more contributing to whom is needed to be selected or who could be selected, you get an idea of who everyone collectively feels is the better player. Not just your scouts.

 

The Chris Sale example would've had merit had I not watched "the season" last night. I forget who it was that said it - but if you watched the show, then you saw what I did. Which was sure they were high on Sale but they didn't expect him to fall. But I believe the scouting director or whoever it was made the statement after Kenny selected Sale of "a whole year of scouting to end up taking the best overall guy - just how it works sometimes". So as much as I am happy we got Sale - he did fall for a reason, we didn't exactly peg this guy out of what was left - he fell into our laps, and in the words of denny green "if you want to crown him, crown him". He hasn't done anything though and isn't the next coming of randy johnson. He is projected as a middle of the rotation guy and there were a couple of big high school arms who we didn't take that will certainly develop into "ace" tags but we went safe.

 

You're absolutely right things are getting better since the fiasco but they are by no means great. Outside of Sale, the draft was very mediocre. We haven't been active in the international market at all - while everyday I see teams sign 1 or 2 guys. Those guys are the ones who turn into your Elvis Andrus's of the world. Young, freakish talent but needs to put it together. Ends up getting dealt for Tex (albeit he and feliz were more of the throw ins then harrison and salty) but it's those kind of guys who can develop and save your ass in trades. And they're easy to get. You just need to pay for them. No luck of the draft, just find them or hear about who finds them and pay them. Escobar is a nice piece but most things I've seen on him is he has peaked defensively, and is very good, but the bat won't ever pan out to be a major league threat.

 

You're 100% right about the Red Sox. I didn't use them because we won't ever be able to do what they or the yankees do. Which is why it is so important to begin to develop a bigger presence in the grand scheme of things. We can't outbid them for players in FA but we certainly can throw more money around in the draft and spend the extra mil or 2 to net the guys that have huge upside which fall to them. Little things first.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Pumpkin Escobar

[chw42]

You just said given the talent, money and therein implied expectations, and then you cite two guys that had "career years"...

 

If Frank and Mags are healthy for even most of the year, we probably win that division.

 

I just don't know how you can put 2004 on Ozzie, but to each his own.

 

Not saying they weren't talented, but they definitely had very good years that season. That 04 Sox team only scored 3 less runs than the 06 Sox team and Kenny made some very good moves to help the pitching staff at the deadline. They tried, they just didn't get there.

Edited July 26, 2010 by chw42

[Pumpkin Escobar]

Well the Angels paid a very significant price to get Haren. Saunders, despite his struggles this year, is a legitimate big league pitcher who has had a ton of success in the AL and on top of that they gave up 2 very good prospects and other pieces.

 

Saunders is very mediocre at best. He may pitch well in the NL but even his one real good season was more fluke then anything. Sure he is a serviceable big league starter but so is half of the twins staff, doubt they would'e netted Haren and if they did - we'd all s*** a brick.

 

The prospects aren't very good at all. If they are good, thats a shocker as I believe many had Corbin outside of their top 20 prospects. See BA, jon sickels, etc. Skaggs or whatever was a compensation pick but again wasn't in there top tier of prospects.

 

Maybe Zona likes them more then most. Which I understand happens but no one else really buys into them. I think the deal was definitely more of a salary dump while attaining a big league piece now. If Saunders keeps a 4 era for them and doesn't get the 5-7 mill he probably will in arb, then he contributes enough where the discount and performance they are happy with I guess.

 

Can't believe they couldn't net one top prospect for Haren when you consider they gave up the world to get him. I mean, he is locked up for relatively cheap. When they got him they gave up two very similar serviceable arms for haren in Greg Smith and Eveland, both had a coupl edecent years. Then they gave up Brett Anderson and Carlos Gonzalez. Then they gave up our guys in Carter and Cunningham. Nothing in the deal they got remotely resembles any of them on the high side.

[bigruss]

Poreda was a 1 pitch pitcher who was out of college. Skaggs was a top prep arm who fell due to signability concerns more than concerns over upside.

Wasnt comparing those two, I was comparing Skaggs to Carter. Both had big time arms and were pitching well at the lower levels.

[Greg Hibbard]

Not saying they weren't talented, but they definitely had very good years that season. That 04 Sox team only scored 3 less runs than the 06 Sox team and Kenny made some very good moves to help the pitching staff at the deadline. They tried, they just didn't get there.

 

Right, but our two best offensive players were injured for most of the year in 2004, and I really think that's impossible to overlook.

 

As for the "90 million plus payroll should get you more than 79 wins" comment, I agree with the literal obviously, but the spirit of it really is "not making the playoffs is disappointing with that payroll", because I sincerely doubt that 79 vs. 85 wins matters much to you in that scenario. Bear in mind that since the beginning of the 06 season just 18/47 teams with a 90 million+ payroll (38.3%) have made the playoffs, so it's not as if it's realistic to count on making the playoffs even half the time with a payroll in that class.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Greg Hibbard

[chw42]

Right, but our two best offensive players were injured for most of the year in 2004, and I really think that's impossible to overlook.

 

As for the "90 million plus payroll should get you more than 79 wins" comment, I agree with the literal obviously, but the spirit of it really is "not making the playoffs is disappointing with that payroll", because I sincerely doubt that 79 vs. 85 wins matters much to you in that scenario. Bear in mind that since the beginning of the 06 season just 18/47 teams with a 90 million+ payroll (38.3%) have made the playoffs, so it's not as if it's realistic to count on making the playoffs even half the time with a payroll in that class.

 

We would have been in the division race with 85 wins last year, so it probably does matter. It's contextual. Usually, you should be better than a .500 team with a $95 million tab.

[whitesoxfan101]

I can't say I want Ozzie and KW gone right now since we're in first place. But I've said for a while now that this regime has underachieved overall, even taking 2005 into account. So if we're at home when the playoffs start again, I can certainly see myself siding with this thread.

[Controlled Chaos]

I normally don't even look at threads like this, but I was intrigued and I'm glad I checked it out. Some very informative and well thought out posts. Kudos to those of you who took the time to put your thoughts into words and make some compelling arguments. Hope to see some of you post more often. It's what makes the site great.

[The Ginger Kid]

it's not about a lineup that can compete with the yankees, red sox and rangers. It's about a pitching staff that can compete with them. So I agree with Jordan, the deal for Haren is frustrating as all hell. I don't give a s*** about the left-handed bat issue except that i'm glad we haven't overpaid (yet) for the likes of Dunn.

[SoxFan562004]

it's not about a lineup that can compete with the yankees, red sox and rangers. It's about a pitching staff that can compete with them. So I agree with Jordan, the deal for Haren is frustrating as all hell. I don't give a s*** about the left-handed bat issue except that i'm glad we haven't overpaid (yet) for the likes of Dunn.

to me it's always hard to be frustrated/mad about a deal that any team didn't get done... it's easy to sit back and look at the end result but realistically we have no idea the inner workings of the deal, ie what communication went on, what the Diamondbacks were looking for, how they scouted every teams prospects, etc..

[greg775]

It'd be interesting how this conversation would play on the more popular talk shows in Chicago today and Ranger's post game show and/or Grobstien's (sp) late night show. As well as a national host like Rome or Patrick?

 

Would the caller be laughed or mocked off the radio for suggesting Oz and KW actually be fired today?

 

Would you be confident in presenting your case to the general masses? Would the discussion be reasonable or would you be belittled?

 

I'm just wondering if the discussion on here would play out with the masses of fans who listen to the radio and attend games?

Would you be confident bringing this up in a public forum, because it would be easy for the host to dismiss the caller off with the host saying, "Sir, this team is in first place! and recently went 25-5."

 

[lostfan]

Well "this team is in first place and recently went 25-5" is a pretty lazy argument and doesn't really say anything worthwhile all by itself. It would be like saying "you must be pretty well off because you drive a BMW"

[RockRaines]

Wow, this thread is still going? I thought it would be closed by now. You would think we were in last place or something.

[greg775]

Rock ... it seems like it's actually picking up steam.

That's why I say it'd be a tough sell on the talk show circuit.

[The Ginger Kid]

Well "this team is in first place and recently went 25-5" is a pretty lazy argument and doesn't really say anything worthwhile all by itself. It would be like saying "you must be pretty well off because you drive a BMW"

how are those 2 things remotely similar? you don't have to have money to driver a BMW, i get that. But you don't have to be a good team to go 25-5 and overcome a 9 game deficit to be in first place?

[stove_williams]

People need to realize if they want the Sox to spend like a big market team, they need to fill the stadium like a big market team. Some of these homestands have been darn right pathetic. 20,000 to 30,000 thousand a night for a first place team is terrible. Go to the damm games and Jerry will spend more money. He showed us that in 2006. I get my ass to at least 20 games a year and I am not rich by any means.

Edited July 27, 2010 by stevewilliams666

[lostfan]

how are those 2 things remotely similar? you don't have to have money to driver a BMW, i get that. But you don't have to be a good team to go 25-5 and overcome a 9 game deficit to be in first place?

That's really not at all what I said.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

People need to realize if they want the Sox to spend like a big market team, they need to fill the stadium like a big market team. Some of these homestands have been darn right pathetic. 20,000 to 30,000 thousand a night for a first place team is terrible. Go to the damm games and Jerry will spend more money. He showed us that in 2006. I get my ass to at least 20 games a year and I am not rich by any means.

That is really it in a nutshell. Everyone is splitting hairs saying there's something wrong or not quite good enough with this that or the other thing. One team wins it all every year. Everyone else goes home so you can split hairs and do that with every team that didn't win the whole enchilada. There's always something to nitpick. Like you hear about 2005 people saying we got lucky that one time with what Kenny did and he won't be able to duplicate it. It's a competitive business with people going after the same things you are. Some things work out well , some don't. C'est la vie. There are haves and have nots in the baseball world without a salary cap. To win a championship at all is amazing to me competing with organizations that outspend you for the best talent in all facets of the game. Thank goodness even spending the most money still doesn't guarantee winning anything.

 

As far as saying I like the way the organization is run now as compared with the past, it just puts things in perspective and truly illustrates how difficult it is to win it all. It's always good discussing the state of the franchise but ultimately it just comes down to nothing is perfect . You do what you can and we as fans can only attend games if we want to see a better product.