The next month, and possible "false positives"

[DukeNukeEm]

The Tigers model also involved a long period of being one of the worst franchises in MLB history as well. That's the reason they have Verlander, they had one of the worst records in baseball. That's part of the reason why they were able to trade for Cabrera; they were able to draft people like Andrew Miller who fell in teh draft because of the messed up draft system (which has been fixed today) who they traded for Cabrera.

The Tigers didn't make the playoffs from 1987 to 2006. That's a pretty massive price to pay for relevance, and that's really all they've gotten because they still haven't taken the World Series. I dont want to be in my 40's when I next see a contending White Sox team. No thanks.

 

So no, I dont want to emulate the Detroit of model of being so bad for so long that you run out of ways to be bad so by default you become good. f*** that, I'll take September collapses and down years over that any day. I like the way we are now. Were almost evenly split the last 10 years between being good or being bad and occasionally were somewhere in between. At least its interesting, at least I know coming into the season that the White Sox have a real chance every year at being good. Only half the teams in this league even have that, maybe less, so instead of b****ing about how we cant be like the St. Louis Cardinals (HINT: EVERYONE WANTS TO BE LIKE ST. LOUIS) how about we enjoy this team as is? They just got back to .500 and its not even June 1st.

[Chicago White Sox]

The Tigers haven't won a WS since 1984. The Giants have won 2 out of the last 3 WS but over the past decade how much better have they been than the Whit Sox. The Cardinals have won a couple of WS recently. One by winning 83 games and another when they finished in 2nd place,. They have though, consistently win lots of games, and get contributions signing bats lile Beltran and Berkman , guys on Marty's wrong side of 30.

The Cardinals are the perfect comparison for the Sox. Get to the postseason and anything can happen. That's why when you have a rotation like the Sox's you go for it as long as your close come July 31st. Also, when did the Cardinals go through their rebuilding process? They did what the Sox are trying to do, they overhauled their scouting and development departments while still trying to win. Based on the young talent they've called up in recent years, it looks like their strategy has worked.

 

Give the Sox some time and our system should improve significantly. We've been operating without a Latin American presence for years. Marco Paddy and the additional international scouts alone should pay big dividends. Throw in the new CBA changes and new leadership in Hahn and we're finally ready to step forward in a positive direction. We don't need to sell off some of our best players to get us there.

[southsider2k5]

The Tigers model also involved a long period of being one of the worst franchises in MLB history as well. That's the reason they have Verlander, they had one of the worst records in baseball. That's part of the reason why they were able to trade for Cabrera; they were able to draft people like Andrew Miller who fell in teh draft because of the messed up draft system (which has been fixed today) who they traded for Cabrera.

 

Not to mention they had to offer some horrible contracts to get back into the game. How about 7 years and $140 to Juan Gonzalez? Or offering 5/$75 to a guy coming off of a huge knee surgery where you knew the first year wasn't even going to happen.

[caulfield12]

Not to mention they had to offer some horrible contracts to get back into the game. How about 7 years and $140 to Juan Gonzalez? Or offering 5/$75 to a guy coming off of a huge knee surgery where you knew the first year wasn't even going to happen.

 

 

That's the model the Royals tried to follow by giving Gil Meche that inexplicable contract.

 

That Kansas City COULD be a FA destination, just like DET (part of the problem was their not so homer friendly stadium at the time with Juan Gone)...so they spent the money to bring in him and I-Roid/Rod.

[southsider2k5]

That's the model the Royals tried to follow by giving Gil Meche that inexplicable contract.

 

That Kansas City COULD be a FA destination, just like DET (part of the problem was their not so homer friendly stadium at the time with Juan Gone)...so they spent the money to bring in him and I-Roid/Rod.

 

The funny part is that then they gave up on that, and turned to the Kenny Williams model of trading prospects for established veterans.

[caulfield12]

The funny part is that then they gave up on that, and turned to the Kenny Williams model of trading prospects for established veterans.

 

A lot of that had to do with the injuries/non-performance issues with John Lamb, Duffy and Montgomery. Moore was under pressure for his job and couldn't wait two more years on their younger pitchers to rehab or go into Year 2 of Tommy John recovery.

 

The one good pitching prospect they had left was Odorizzi, who will ironically become a star in TB with their (Royals') bad luck.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

A lot of that had to do with the injuries/non-performance issues with John Lamb, Duffy and Montgomery. Moore was under pressure for his job and couldn't wait two more years on their younger pitchers to rehab or go into Year 2 of Tommy John recovery.

 

The one good pitching prospect they had left was Odorizzi, who will ironically become a star in TB with their (Royals') bad luck.

 

Prospects not panning out in KC is the rule, not the exception.

[caulfield12]

Prospects not panning out in KC is the rule, not the exception.

 

There are exceptions.

 

Alex Gordon, 2-3 years later...and not at his original position. And obviously kind of a no-brainer for them to draft coming out of Univ of Nebraska/Omaha connection.

 

Bo Jackson. Who was a gift from Mt. Olympus as much as a product of minor league development.

 

Mike Sweeney, originally a catcher....was on the verge of being released, then caught fire when moved to 1B.

 

 

Then you have to go back a decade back to Carlos Beltran and Johnny Damon...

 

Littered along that path are the likes of Bob Hamelin, Jose Rosado (injuries), Jim Pittsley, Dee Brown, Colt Griffin, Mark Quinn, Angel Berroa, Luke Hochevar, Carlos Febles and many many others.

Edited May 27, 2013 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Prospects not panning out in KC is the rule, not the exception.

 

[Texsox]

Prospects not panning out in KC is the rule, not the exception.

 

Which is one reason I have never gotten that much excited at the MLB draft and my pulse barely bumps at guys that are 26-40 on the 40-man roster. I'll take prospects for MLB ready players almost everyday.

[caulfield12]

Which is one reason I have never gotten that much excited at the MLB draft and my pulse barely bumps at guys that are 26-40 on the 40-man roster. I'll take prospects for MLB ready players almost everyday.

 

 

Which worked most of the time for KW to be able to flip those guys for the Carlos Quentins of the world.

 

The problem arose when our system was so bereft off talent that we couldn't make legitimate plays for the Miggy Cabreras...superstar-caliber talent to build a franchise around.

 

And it works as long as you don't give up quality young starting pitching (Gio and Hudson) for players who don't get you into the post-season or who have much less value than when you traded for them (Swisher) or are traded for less than their worth (Santos/Jackson) for payroll reasons.

 

Then you end up with a cycle where you have less and less talent on the major league roster...and you don't have any avenues for acquiring new talent without taking on additional payroll or dumping players who can actually help you win now for players who MIGHT help you win in the future and for a bit longer window.

Edited May 28, 2013 by caulfield12

[The Ultimate Champion]

The Cardinals are the perfect comparison for the Sox. Get to the postseason and anything can happen. That's why when you have a rotation like the Sox's you go for it as long as your close come July 31st. Also, when did the Cardinals go through their rebuilding process? They did what the Sox are trying to do, they overhauled their scouting and development departments while still trying to win. Based on the young talent they've called up in recent years, it looks like their strategy has worked.

 

Give the Sox some time and our system should improve significantly. We've been operating without a Latin American presence for years. Marco Paddy and the additional international scouts alone should pay big dividends. Throw in the new CBA changes and new leadership in Hahn and we're finally ready to step forward in a positive direction. We don't need to sell off some of our best players to get us there.

I agree with what you are saying here.

 

One question though: what happens when we *don't* win? The Sox have pitching, yes, but they have also run out far more talented teams than this one over the last decade plus which have come back empty handed.

 

IMO, if we don't win, we get the following:

 

1) Peavy/Rios lose that little extra bit of value, especially Peavy. I'm against trading Peavy without getting MLB-ready pieces back anyway, but if that deal is out there, then he's worth more now then he will be in the offseason.

 

2) We potentially lose the opportunity to get something, rather than nothing, out of Crain, Thornton, Lindstrom, etc.

 

3) It gets harder to unload Alexei's contract.

 

4) Maybe most importantly, we lose the ability to audition players in August and September and then we have to do a repeat with several players in 2014 what we have done with Flowers this year, i.e. try to develop them but still expect him to produce early in the season while we still may turn into a contender.

 

I think that if we don't win, all in all, we lose out on the chance to add some more talent to the organization, and we lose the ability to let that talent play for us whether that is at the MiLB or MLB level, and we also lose the opportunity to evaluate that talent over the rest of the season to help build a clearer picture of what we need to do over the offseason.

 

I am not a proponent of "tanking" even though I do propose we make some trades which probably gives us a pretty s***ty record this year. But to me that's not tanking, because tanking involves dismantling our starting rotation and I don't think that is even remotely an option. Peavy only goes in an excellent deal that brings us back pieces right now, and beyond that, out of the bullpen we'd deal some guys who would likely be out of the picture after this year anyway. I would put Reed out there on the block to see if some contender is willing to give up a sweet looking position player or starting pitching prospect that we see as being only 2 years away or less, but even he stays otherwise. I think if we make some moves this season we will enter into the offseason with greater clarity, and after the next offseason, at worst, I think we'll enter into 2014 with a team very similar in quality and depth to the ones we had going into 2012 & 2013.

Edited May 28, 2013 by The Ultimate Champion

[kitekrazy]

Not to mention they have an owner willing to go into the red, even Forbes says they lose money, to keep adding players. It is an unrealistic model to copy, and I wonder how long it can or will be sustainable.

 

His goal is to win a World Series. I like his attitude. It sure beats "competitive". The scenario is much different since he feels his days are numbered. The Steinbrener model only works if you have the revenue. I doubt they are losing a lot of money in Detroit. If you have superstars like Verlander, Cabrera and Fielder, how many people are going to stay home.

Something the Sox haven't been able to do is have back to back post seasons. Those put fans in the seats.

 

 

[kitekrazy]

I agree with what you are saying here.

 

One question though: what happens when we *don't* win? The Sox have pitching, yes, but they have also run out far more talented teams than this one over the last decade plus which have come back empty handed.

 

IMO, if we don't win, we get the following:

 

1) Peavy/Rios lose that little extra bit of value, especially Peavy. I'm against trading Peavy without getting MLB-ready pieces back anyway, but if that deal is out there, then he's worth more now then he will be in the offseason.

 

2) We potentially lose the opportunity to get something, rather than nothing, out of Crain, Thornton, Lindstrom, etc.

 

3) It gets harder to unload Alexei's contract.

 

4) Maybe most importantly, we lose the ability to audition players in August and September and then we have to do a repeat with several players in 2014 what we have done with Flowers this year, i.e. try to develop them but still expect him to produce early in the season while we still may turn into a contender.

 

I think that if we don't win, all in all, we lose out on the chance to add some more talent to the organization, and we lose the ability to let that talent play for us whether that is at the MiLB or MLB level, and we also lose the opportunity to evaluate that talent over the rest of the season to help build a clearer picture of what we need to do over the offseason.

 

I am not a proponent of "tanking" even though I do propose we make some trades which probably gives us a pretty s***ty record this year. But to me that's not tanking, because tanking involves dismantling our starting rotation and I don't think that is even remotely an option. Peavy only goes in an excellent deal that brings us back pieces right now, and beyond that, out of the bullpen we'd deal some guys who would likely be out of the picture after this year anyway. I would put Reed out there on the block to see if some contender is willing to give up a sweet looking position player or starting pitching prospect that we see as being only 2 years away or less, but even he stays otherwise. I think if we make some moves this season we will enter into the offseason with greater clarity, and after the next offseason, at worst, I think we'll enter into 2014 with a team very similar in quality and depth to the ones we had going into 2012 & 2013.

 

Something for nothing never really works out. Since when is Alexei's contract a burden by today's salaries. We are using the Reinsdorf penny pinching ruler. Ugh.

Wins and losses rarely mean anything when it comes to a player's value.

 

[Balta1701]

His goal is to win a World Series. I like his attitude. It sure beats "competitive". The scenario is much different since he feels his days are numbered. The Steinbrener model only works if you have the revenue. I doubt they are losing a lot of money in Detroit. If you have superstars like Verlander, Cabrera and Fielder, how many people are going to stay home.

Something the Sox haven't been able to do is have back to back post seasons. Those put fans in the seats.

I don't think it's going to be nearly as fun to have that attitude when they're paying the last few years of Fielder's deal.

[kitekrazy]

I don't think it's going to be nearly as fun to have that attitude when they're paying the last few years of Fielder's deal.

 

Detroit media was very critical of that deal. Not so much about the length but they overpaid since no one was biting early on the agent's demand. At least it made Hendry proud.

 

[caulfield12]

In the end, if Illitch can win a World Series, he'll inevitably argue all those contracts (Verlander and Fielder, in particular) were worth it.

[Balta1701]

In the end, if Illitch can win a World Series, he'll inevitably argue all those contracts (Verlander and Fielder, in particular) were worth it.

This is correct. But as anyone should know...MLB isn't exactly a foregone conclusion. Big money guys can get hurt and then not come back the way they're supposed to (Victor Martinez). The Playoffs can go insane (See: Justin Verlander versus Pablo Sandoval).

 

It's a very expensive gamble.

[caulfield12]

OOOPS.

 

JINX.

 

I guess I was somewhat correct about "false positives," not that it's fun for the White Sox fandom the next 4 months to be so bleak.

 

Hopefully there are some interesting moves made for everyone to discuss.