Would you have done things different?

[bmags]

On a minor league deal, sure.

 

I would too. Everyone was such a dumpster fire in April last year, and then we shuffled him into roles until he was injured. If he's not ready to retire, I'd give him a shot. Bullpens don't make sense very often.

[southsider2k5]

I would too. Everyone was such a dumpster fire in April last year, and then we shuffled him into roles until he was injured. If he's not ready to retire, I'd give him a shot. Bullpens don't make sense very often.

 

I don't know that he was ever quite right after his injury last year.

[Thad Bosley]

The Tigers also drew 1.3 (or around 80% higher attendance) million more through the turnstyles last year, and have the entire Detroit metro market to themselves.

The Tigers have the #11th largest metro area all to themselves, while the Sox have almost half of the 3rd largest metro area all to themselves, so numbers wise, it's almost a wash. So there's that.

 

Detroit has also been drawing more recently because they've been winning more recently, due in no small part because they've been spending more recently. Spending more than us, winning more than us, and therefore, drawing more than us. What to make of that!

 

If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Thad Bosley

[southsider2k5]

The Tigers have the #11th largest metro area all to themselves, while the Sox have almost half of the 3rd largest metro area all to themselves, so numbers wise, it's almost a wash. So there's that.

 

Detroit has also been drawing more recently because they've been winning more recently, due in no small part because they've been spending more recently. Spending more than us, winning more than us, and therefore, drawing more than us. What to make of that!

 

If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying.

 

No.

 

The Sox might have a third of it. Might.

 

And the bottom line is if Sox fans were turning the turnstyles like Detroit fans are, we'd have their payroll.

[Thad Bosley]

No.

 

The Sox might have a third of it. Might.

 

And the bottom line is if Sox fans were turning the turnstyles like Detroit fans are, we'd have their payroll.

Yessssss, and why is that? Because the organization has failed to wrestle more of that market share by earning it through winning. It's been there for the taking, given the Cubs's perennial losing ways.

 

The Tigers were drawing as much as the Sox are today less than ten years ago, right around the time when we were winning it all. How did they manage to turn it around such that they can now float a payroll 50% greater than that of the Sox? Answer - sustained winning, supported by bigger spending than the Sox.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Thad Bosley

[LDF]

Yessssss, and why is that? Because the organization has failed to wrestle more of that market share by earning it through winning. It's been there for the taking, given the Cubs's perennial losing ways.

 

and they blew it away with a total mismanagement and frugal spending. just putting

enuf to get them maybe in the playoff or at least able to compete.

 

the 90's the sox had a makings of a great team, blew it with lousy drafts, and not going

the little extra in salary. wasted yrs, wasted talent.

Edited January 6, 2015 by LDF

[Thad Bosley]

No.

 

The Sox might have a third of it. Might.

 

And the bottom line is if Sox fans were turning the turnstyles like Detroit fans are, we'd have their payroll.

Just out of curiosity, how do you know that?

[LDF]

The Tigers have the #11th largest metro area all to themselves, while the Sox have almost half of the 3rd largest metro area all to themselves, so numbers wise, it's almost a wash. So there's that.

 

Detroit has also been drawing more recently because they've been winning more recently, due in no small part because they've been spending more recently. Spending more than us, winning more than us, and therefore, drawing more than us. What to make of that!

 

If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying.

 

going out on a limb is getting a SP to really put the nail in the coffin esp in the chicago land

competition for baseball. all the sox really need to make the playoff and with a great team.

then do not let the pressure up, and continue to upgrade.

[BlackSox13]

Just like to point out that Detroit does not have another team across town to compete for the attention of the fan base while the Sox do.

 

MMKAY...

[LDF]

Just like to point out that Detroit does not have another team across town to compete for the attention of the fan base while the Sox do.

 

MMKAY...

 

chi has that dragon on the north side that is teflon. they can't do no wrong. so the best

way to deal, compete is to win, and win big. field a team that will help the cause. with Hahn

i believe the sox have the right guy calling the shots, only he needs a little more financial

flexibility.

[BlackSox13]

chi has that dragon on the north side that is teflon. they can't do no wrong. so the best

way to deal, compete is to win, and win big. field a team that will help the cause. with Hahn

i believe the sox have the right guy calling the shots, only he needs a little more financial

flexibility.

Could not agree more. Found this nice write by Rogers on the Sox site...

 

http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/105...icago-white-sox

 

"With Bonifacio added, the White Sox are headed toward a $120 million payroll after opening last season at about $90 million. They are working to trade Viciedo, and can pay for Bonifacio's $4 million guarantee (for 2015 and the buyout of a '16 option) if they find a taker."

[Thad Bosley]

Just like to point out that Detroit does not have another team across town to compete for the attention of the fan base while the Sox do.

 

MMKAY...

And just who have we been competing with the last 100+ years? Ah, yes - the Cubs, the biggest losers in the history of the sport. Sorry, but not really the best excuse, nor one we should hide behind.

[LDF]

Could not agree more. Found this nice write by Rogers on the Sox site...

 

http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/105...icago-white-sox

 

"With Bonifacio added, the White Sox are headed toward a $120 million payroll after opening last season at about $90 million. They are working to trade Viciedo, and can pay for Bonifacio's $4 million guarantee (for 2015 and the buyout of a '16 option) if they find a taker."

 

that was a great write up. thanks

[southsider2k5]

Yessssss, and why is that? Because the organization has failed to wrestle more of that market share by earning it through winning. It's been there for the taking, given the Cubs's perennial losing ways.

 

The Tigers were drawing as much as the Sox are today less than ten years ago, right around the time when we were winning it all. How did they manage to turn it around such that they can now float a payroll 50% greater than that of the Sox? Answer - sustained winning, supported by bigger spending than the Sox.

 

Yet the Cubs are drawing how many more fans without winning a damned thing?

[southsider2k5]

Just out of curiosity, how do you know that?

 

And how did you base your half number?

[BlackSox13]

And just who have we been competing with the last 100+ years? Ah, yes - the Cubs, the biggest losers in the history of the sport. Sorry, but not really the best excuse, nor one we should hide behind.

Point is that the Tigers do not have the competition for the fans attention since they are the only team in Detroit. Most baseball fans in Chicago chose one or the other but not both so the money goes to one or the other.

 

Example: I am a Sox fan and only support the Sox so the cubs get zero money from me.

 

that was a great write up. thanks

Any time man. I'm not the biggest Rogers fan but it is a well written article.

 

Yet the Cubs are drawing how many more fans without winning a damned thing?

Comes back to the cubs having more dedicated fans than the Sox. Sad but true.

[VAfan]

Hahn has definitely upgraded the team this off season. Still, if the White Sox are going to contend for a playoff spot in 2015, the team needs another starting pitcher. Noesi and Danks are not going to get the team into the playoffs. Hopefully Hahn can get the team another starter before opening day.

 

I think Hahn and the Sox are counting on Rodon becoming that starting pitcher for at least some of 2015. That's why I wouldn't be surprised to see him begin in the bullpen, to save his innings until later so he could start games till the end of the season if he did well.

 

No one else is worth the money they are asking as free agents, so I doubt the Sox go that route. And any trade would cost prospects Hahn has taken pains to protect.

[LDF]

Yet the Cubs are drawing how many more fans without winning a damned thing?

 

you are soooo right. they made loosing a fun thing.

 

at least sox fans are smarter and they do insist of a winning team.

[witesoxfan]

If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying.

 

You are endorsing a policy where Reinsdorf and the board spend $150 million a year on payroll. Regardless of the feasibility of that idea (according to these numbers, which are approximations, only 5 teams spent $150 million in payroll last year and the White Sox and Cubs COMBINED did not spend $150 million), what would you have spent that money on? It seems absurd that you are indicting Reinsdorf on not spending money and then not offering an alternative plan as to what would be done with that money. Are you implying that he should spend money just to spend money? Or are you using revisionist history and saying "they should have won more"? If you are going to say that they didn't win more in the last 10-15 years because Reinsdorf didn't spend money, then I will wholeheartedly and unabashedly disagree with you, because a sufficient amount of money was spent. If anything, that falls on the players on the field, the managers and coaches on the bench, and the people in the front office.

 

I do agree that they can spend more if the acquisition makes sense. At this juncture, how would you justify another expenditure like that? Bring in a guy like Scherzer, even though historical data shows us that pitchers who are worthwhile for 7 years are exceedingly rare? Bring in a guy like Shields who is already 33 and has shown some of the telltale signs of slowing down? Really, neither of those make sense and it takes an injury to either one of them to cripple the Sox and limit their flexibility in finding replacements. Frankly, the only sorts of moves that make sense are moves to shore up the depth of the club in the event that an injury strikes, and I think Hahn has shown just in the past years that he's constantly trying to do that. Considering they are also trying to allocate some money to sign Samardzija long-term while also accounting for raises to Abreu, Eaton, Sale, and Quintana, I think it makes sense to look at the current team through a long-term lens rather than a "spend everything, damn the margins, and try and win it this year!" This is a team that probably has a 40% chance of a playoff birth but they should be competitive and should win a lot more than they did last season. After the previous two meager seasons, I'd ultimately be happy with an 85 win team, even if there would be immediate disappointment if/when they were eliminated from playoff contention.

 

This is not an overnight process. Hopefully in 3 years, given what Hahn and the front office are doing to ensure long-term viability of the club while also doing their best to make the current club competitive, the Sox will be spending $150 million a year. There's no guarantee that this works. Thus, spending some and going out on a limb to try and put together a competitive team will either further justify spending or will allow them to trade a lot of these pieces off. If they signed Scherzer/Shields at this point, and it was inherently obvious within a year and a half that the team wasn't going to be competitive, you are likely stuck with that contract because the surplus value from either contract is not enough to justify another team trading for them. The current philosophy makes sense.

[Eminor3rd]

JR doesn't have a moral imperative to spend all his money on the Sox any more than any of us have a moral imperative to spend ours.

[ptatc]

Sounds, then, like the Sox are operating at quite a competitive disadvantage, which really shouldn't be the case for a team playing in a large market.

There is no competitive disadvantage other than they have a lower share of a large market. Many other teams employ the same type of board structure. There are some exceptions, such as the Cubs and Detriot. But that is how a business works.

 

The most important thing they could do is gain a larger share of the market from the cubs. I'm sure they are working on it. This was the big failing of the JR regime. The tried to do the sportsvision network similar to the Yankees but they were too new to the town and didn't realize how bad it would turn out. They didn't have the same dominance that the Yankees did and many fans turned to watch the cubs free.

[southsider2k5]

There is no competitive disadvantage other than they have a lower share of a large market. Many other teams employ the same type of board structure. There are some exceptions, such as the Cubs and Detriot. But that is how a business works.

 

The most important thing they could do is gain a larger share of the market from the cubs. I'm sure they are working on it. This was the big failing of the JR regime. The tried to do the sportsvision network similar to the Yankees but they were too new to the town and didn't realize how bad it would turn out. They didn't have the same dominance that the Yankees did and many fans turned to watch the cubs free.

 

The really interesting thing is the Cubs seem to be following the same history the Sox did, and form their own network, after not being on network TV like they used to. Once the Cubs do form their own network, they won't have nearly the viewing audience as they do now.

[ptatc]

Just out of curiosity, how do you know that?

Advertising money, tv ratings, fan attendance, team logo sales. All of which can be found in Forbes and is usually about 2/3 Cubs.

[ptatc]

If you choose not to be insulted by hearing or reading stories of Jerry Reinsdorf's asserted benevolence because he approved that last additional "expenditure" for Cabrera's contract, which pushed the team payroll just over the $100 million mark, you go right ahead. That's just barely getting the team to the MLB team average for payroll, and therefore I refuse to fall prey to the team's propaganda and talking points that they're somehow going out on a limb on all of this recent spending. Meanwhile, the reigning division champs continue to spend almost 50% more than the Sox. I find that disparity unacceptable, that's all I'm saying.

The sox attendance has been awful in the 2000's. They have been in the bottom 1/3 or 1/4 almost every year. They were in the top half once in 2006 after they won the world series and that was just barely at 15.

 

All teams share in the TV and internet revenue. The teams all negotiate their own local broadcast rights. The sox are always substantially lower than the cubs. Thus the teams know all of their revenue prior to the season except one variable: attendance and the associated income ie. parking drink sales etc.

 

JR has always said that he will not lose money for the Board. What business would? Thus they can guess about how much they can budget to player salary pretty closely except for attendance. Now given the Sox fans history on not coming to the games, would you go out a limb and really raise the player salary budget? history shows the Sox need to win with a moderate payroll, so they just need to have Hahn know what he is doing.

 

Sox fans will not support a high budget. The other option is to hope that when JR's kids sell the team a guy like Mark Cuban who doesn't need to care about money buys the team. I know baseball owners won't approve him but that type of person. Maybe George Lucas as in retirement he seems to be getting more involved in Chicago, although his primary sports fandom revolves around racing.

[VAfan]

I believe it is possible in the same sense that Hector Noesi could win the Cy Young this year; that it's an entirely plausible possibility because he pitches for a MLB team and is virtually assured of a spot in a starting rotation. What limits it's likelihood is the fact that Hector Noesi is not a very good starting pitcher.

 

Yes, Scherzer to the Sox is a possibility in that he is a good pitcher and he is a free agent. That he is going to cost an astronomical amount of money and will require a minimum of a 6 year deal and very likely a 7 year deal (or more) and that the Sox have never signed a pitcher to a contract that exorbitant in their history and likely won't for quite some time now makes it a virtual impossibility.

 

I wouldn't be surprised is Scherzer's multi-year demands are not met by any team, leaving him to consider a one-year deal and re-try. In that scenario, I could see the Sox in the mix, as we would have the lowest draft pick loss of any team, and would be sure to get back a higher one when Scherzer isn't re-signed.

 

Still a longshot. But not impossible.