MLBTradeRumors Offseason Outlook

[LDF]

It may be unrealistic to "expect" the owner to sell (sadly enough), but it's certainly not unrealistic to "want" him to sell, because believe you me, we need the "post Reinsdorf" era to begin sooner rather than later. 35 years of this ownership, whether you look at the last ten years, the first ten years, or whatever - enough is enough! The organization needs a bold new strategy and vision, because what's been in place is not working, and I don't think after 35 years that Mr. Reinsdorf is capable at this point of doing anything much differently than what he has been doing. Maybe I'm wrong, and if he cares to prove me wrong, I'm certainly open to it, but I don't see that happening.

 

As for your second comment about needing to win vs. just finding baseball "worth watching", well, we have been watching, at least the people who frequent this site. We've been watching for a long time now. Despite the less-than-desirable product we've been presented with for quite some time, we still find it worth watching. Why? Because through it all, we remain Sox fans, through and through. So we are watching. Now the question is, is it too much to ask to sprinkle in a little more winning than has been the case for the past ten years? Is it too much to ask for the opportunity to wave "white socks" like a crazy person at U.S. Cellular Field in mid-October, cheering madly for the team we love, at least more frequently than one or two games per decade? That is the ask here. For those who find this request some form of "whining" or "complaining" or "moaning" or whatever, so be it. Call it what you want. But that's what true White Sox fans crave for their ballclub - success! And by golly, we are not going to stop talking about it until we get it!!

 

 

excellent... i wish i said that.

[Dick Allen]

It may be unrealistic to "expect" the owner to sell (sadly enough), but it's certainly not unrealistic to "want" him to sell, because believe you me, we need the "post Reinsdorf" era to begin sooner rather than later. 35 years of this ownership, whether you look at the last ten years, the first ten years, or whatever - enough is enough! The organization needs a bold new strategy and vision, because what's been in place is not working, and I don't think after 35 years that Mr. Reinsdorf is capable at this point of doing anything much differently than what he has been doing. Maybe I'm wrong, and if he cares to prove me wrong, I'm certainly open to it, but I don't see that happening.

 

As for your second comment about needing to win vs. just finding baseball "worth watching", well, we have been watching, at least the people who frequent this site. We've been watching for a long time now. Despite the less-than-desirable product we've been presented with for quite some time, we still find it worth watching. Why? Because through it all, we remain Sox fans, through and through. So we are watching. Now the question is, is it too much to ask to sprinkle in a little more winning than has been the case for the past ten years? Is it too much to ask for the opportunity to wave "white socks" like a crazy person at U.S. Cellular Field in mid-October, cheering madly for the team we love, at least more frequently than one or two games per decade? That is the ask here. For those who find this request some form of "whining" or "complaining" or "moaning" or whatever, so be it. Call it what you want. But that's what true White Sox fans crave for their ballclub - success! And by golly, we are not going to stop talking about it until we get it!!

 

If in October of 2005, you had the choice of the White Sox winning the WS and having the next decade go like it has gone, or losing the WS and duplicating the Tigers since then with a WS appearance, and plenty of playoff appearances, but no wins, what do you choose?

[southsider2k5]

It may be unrealistic to "expect" the owner to sell (sadly enough), but it's certainly not unrealistic to "want" him to sell, because believe you me, we need the "post Reinsdorf" era to begin sooner rather than later. 35 years of this ownership, whether you look at the last ten years, the first ten years, or whatever - enough is enough! The organization needs a bold new strategy and vision, because what's been in place is not working, and I don't think after 35 years that Mr. Reinsdorf is capable at this point of doing anything much differently than what he has been doing. Maybe I'm wrong, and if he cares to prove me wrong, I'm certainly open to it, but I don't see that happening.

 

As for your second comment about needing to win vs. just finding baseball "worth watching", well, we have been watching, at least the people who frequent this site. We've been watching for a long time now. Despite the less-than-desirable product we've been presented with for quite some time, we still find it worth watching. Why? Because through it all, we remain Sox fans, through and through. So we are watching. Now the question is, is it too much to ask to sprinkle in a little more winning than has been the case for the past ten years? Is it too much to ask for the opportunity to wave "white socks" like a crazy person at U.S. Cellular Field in mid-October, cheering madly for the team we love, at least more frequently than one or two games per decade? That is the ask here. For those who find this request some form of "whining" or "complaining" or "moaning" or whatever, so be it. Call it what you want. But that's what true White Sox fans crave for their ballclub - success! And by golly, we are not going to stop talking about it until we get it!!

 

 

Oh I have no doubt about the last line. The same things over and over and over... We even got the obligatory 35 years! in there.

[LDF]

If in October of 2005, you had the choice of the White Sox winning the WS and having the next decade go like it has gone, or losing the WS and duplicating the Tigers since then with a WS appearance, and plenty of playoff appearances, but no wins, what do you choose?

 

the WS win....

 

 

[gatnom]

I have never said anything remotely close to this. Not once. I think too many people are taking the idea that our fans aren't loyal, personally. For me, the numbers are there. The truth is there.

 

I suppose I paraphrased a bit too much with that statement, but you have to have hundreds of posts on here about how more fans = more money = more wins. Like this post here:

 

The Cubs drew 2.6 million in 2013 and 2014. 2014 attendance was up over the previous year. The White Sox have drawn that much twice in the last twenty years. They drew ONE MILLION MORE FANS then we did in 2014, in their sixth straight year of under .500 baseball. We even had a year in 2012 where we were in first place until the last two weeks of the season, and still got out drawn by 900,000 fans by a Cubs team that went 61-101.

 

Again, that gives them options that the White Sox don't have.

 

And that is my point exactly when talking about "plans". The Royals fan base was decimated, and because of that it took them WAY longer than a team like the Cubs who has a fan base that still shows up. Our fan base is much closer to the Royals in terms of being willing to see out a "plan". That is my point exactly, and I am glad you finally get it.

 

While in general more money is never a bad thing, you conveniently leave out the fact that the White Sox payroll is squarely in the middle of the pack (

 

If you want to direct your irrational anger towards the fans instead of Ventura, KW, RH or any of the people actually partially responsible for why we are bad, that's your prerogative.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

the WS win....

So this regime is at least better than Detroit's .

 

Since the White Sox last won the WS, the only other organizations to win the WS are:

 

Boston

St. Louis

San Francisco

NY Yankees

Philadelphia

 

24 other organizations have a WS title drought longer than the White Sox. It will be 23 in a few weeks.

[southsider2k5]

I suppose I paraphrased a bit too much with that statement, but you have to have hundreds of posts on here about how more fans = more money = more wins. Like this post here:

 

 

 

While in general more money is never a bad thing, you conveniently leave out the fact that the White Sox payroll is squarely in the middle of the pack (

 

If you want to direct your irrational anger towards the fans instead of Ventura, KW, RH or any of the people actually partially responsible for why we are bad, that's your prerogative.

 

To me it is common sense that the more resources a team has means the more chances it has to be successful and to be able to spend over its mistakes. I wouldn't call that irrational at all. We see it all over baseball in the 21st century. If wanting more resources for the team is irrational, I am OK with being irrational.

 

 

 

[gatnom]

To me it is common sense that the more resources a team has means the more chances it has to be successful and to be able to spend over its mistakes. I wouldn't call that irrational at all. We see it all over baseball in the 21st century. If wanting more resources for the team is irrational, I am OK with being irrational.

 

You ignored the rest of my post, but that's ok. I don't disagree that more money is a good thing. I just realize they already have more than enough to be a good franchise.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

You ignored the rest of my post, but that's ok. I don't disagree that more money is a good thing. I just realize they already have more than enough to be a good franchise.

It depends. Money changes the way you operate. Andrew Friedman seems to be a different type of deal maker with the Dodgers than he was with the Rays. He can throw money everywhere and if it doesn't work out, no big deal.

 

I think the biggest advantage with money vs. small market is not necessarily being able to sign the $200 million guys. IMO, it is the ability to hang on to your guys. The teams in perpetual rebuilding develop guys, then they get good so they can't pay them, so they are traded and they have to start the cycle again.

 

That's why I don't understand the people complaining about it being 7 years since the Sox were last in the playoffs, so trade Chris Sale. That suggests waiting another 7.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Dick Allen

[southsider2k5]

You ignored the rest of my post, but that's ok. I don't disagree that more money is a good thing. I just realize they already have more than enough to be a good franchise.

 

According to the last Business of Baseball by Forbes, the White Sox were 20th in MLB in total revenues. 20th is also where the White Sox finished in overall record this year. 1 team that finished behind them in total revenue made the playoffs this year. 9 of the 19 teams in front of them made it. 5 of the top 10 teams in total revenue from the 2015 list made the playoffs.

[LittleHurt05]

If in October of 2005, you had the choice of the White Sox winning the WS and having the next decade go like it has gone, or losing the WS and duplicating the Tigers since then with a WS appearance, and plenty of playoff appearances, but no wins, what do you choose?

 

How about I choose both? A WS win and a sustained run of success?

 

This WS title is gonna end up being a curse to the franchise with fans thinking like you.

[Dick Allen]

How about I choose both? A WS win and a sustained run of success?

 

This WS title is gonna end up being a curse to the franchise with fans thinking like you.

 

 

If winning a WS is a curse, I'll take the curse. As I pointed out, in a couple of weeks, there still will be 23 teams that haven't won a WS since the White Sox did.

[Chisoxfn]

the WS win....

Honestly, I think I go for the multiple playoff appearances. Its more fun when your team is relevant. Yes, I like to win, but I also enjoy baseball and to have just one season that I enjoyed a lot and then 8 crappy ones or 7 or 8 seasons that I enjoyed (maybe not as much as that one), we'll I'll go quantity over quality in this case.

 

Now no one ever knows that, but if you asked me as a fan, I'd always say give me multiple playoff chances (because I think the post-season is a crapshoot anyway).

[OmarComing25]

Honestly, I think I go for the multiple playoff appearances. Its more fun when your team is relevant. Yes, I like to win, but I also enjoy baseball and to have just one season that I enjoyed a lot and then 8 crappy ones or 7 or 8 seasons that I enjoyed (maybe not as much as that one), we'll I'll go quantity over quality in this case.

 

Now no one ever knows that, but if you asked me as a fan, I'd always say give me multiple playoff chances (because I think the post-season is a crapshoot anyway).

I'm inclined to agree, I think people overrate titles, especially in a sport as random as baseball. The Tigers/White Sox question is a good one, and since we've been so starved for baseball championships in this city people would lean towards the title, but in most cases I'd lean towards the Tigers here.

 

For another example, in my opinion the Braves making the playoffs 14 years in a row and only having 1 title to show for it >>>>>>>> Marlins winning 2 titles randomly and sucking the rest of the time.

[gatnom]

According to the last Business of Baseball by Forbes, the White Sox were 20th in MLB in total revenues. 20th is also where the White Sox finished in overall record this year. 1 team that finished behind them in total revenue made the playoffs this year. 9 of the 19 teams in front of them made it. 5 of the top 10 teams in total revenue from the 2015 list made the playoffs.

 

I believe there is more to a business than just revenue. But, even ignoring all of that, the White Sox seem to have no problem putting up a very competitive payroll.

 

It shouldn't be surprising that teams who win more generate more revenue?

 

 

[gatnom]

It depends. Money changes the way you operate. Andrew Friedman seems to be a different type of deal maker with the Dodgers than he was with the Rays. He can throw money everywhere and if it doesn't work out, no big deal.

 

I think the biggest advantage with money vs. small market is not necessarily being able to sign the $200 million guys. IMO, it is the ability to hang on to your guys. The teams in perpetual rebuilding develop guys, then they get good so they can't pay them, so they are traded and they have to start the cycle again.

 

That's why I don't understand the people complaining about it being 7 years since the Sox were last in the playoffs, so trade Chris Sale. That suggests waiting another 7.

 

One thing you're missing, IMO, is that he can take on bad contracts in lieu of giving up talent as well.

 

As far as the Sox and Sale, I think they'll probably have to deal some of their major league ready pitching if they truly want to be able to compete next year, but I have a hard time believing there's a Sale deal out there that remotely makes sense.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

I'm inclined to agree, I think people overrate titles, especially in a sport as random as baseball. The Tigers/White Sox question is a good one, and since we've been so starved for baseball championships in this city people would lean towards the title, but in most cases I'd lean towards the Tigers here.

 

For another example, in my opinion the Braves making the playoffs 14 years in a row and only having 1 title to show for it >>>>>>>> Marlins winning 2 titles randomly and sucking the rest of the time.

But the question included, you know you weren't going to win. I understand multiple playoff appearances. I get that, but if you get swept out of the first round, or you're like the Pirates and make it 3 times in a row but lose 3-2 the first time and the 2 WC games the next time, isn't a title and a 90 win, and 85 win and 88 win season with no playoffs, and another playoff appearance bowing out in 4 games, far better?

 

 

I think the whiners have taken over and pretty much are starting to brainwash everyone into think the White Sox have lost 100 games a year the last decade. They have had 4 or 5 decent seasons. Sure, the past 3 have been difficult, but they seem to be on a better track. A lot of stuff went wrong this past year. I love that they aren't blaming the manager. Blaming players is the fastest way to get things to change.

[OmarComing25]

But the question included, you know you weren't going to win. I understand multiple playoff appearances. I get that, but if you get swept out of the first round, or you're like the Pirates and make it 3 times in a row but lose 3-2 the first time and the 2 WC games the next time, isn't a title and a 90 win, and 85 win and 88 win season with no playoffs, and another playoff appearance bowing out in 4 games, far better?

 

 

I think the whiners have taken over and pretty much are starting to brainwash everyone into think the White Sox have lost 100 games a year the last decade. They have had 4 or 5 decent seasons. Sure, the past 3 have been difficult, but they seem to be on a better track. A lot of stuff went wrong this past year. I love that they aren't blaming the manager. Blaming players is the fastest way to get things to change.

That's why I'm on the fence with the Sox/Tigers. Also, I agree with you in your second paragraph. People act like the White Sox have been utterly terrible for the last decade, but from 2006-2012 we were usually pretty competitive. The last 3 seasons have created the perception that things have been this bad for a long time, when that just isn't true.

[Bigsoxhurt35]

did anyone get to listen to the mlb rumor podcast with Hahn today. he was going to discuss the offseason.

Would like a link to this if anyone finds it. Thanks

[LDF]

It depends. Money changes the way you operate. Andrew Friedman seems to be a different type of deal maker with the Dodgers than he was with the Rays. He can throw money everywhere and if it doesn't work out, no big deal.

 

I think the biggest advantage with money vs. small market is not necessarily being able to sign the $200 million guys. IMO, it is the ability to hang on to your guys. The teams in perpetual rebuilding develop guys, then they get good so they can't pay them, so they are traded and they have to start the cycle again.

 

That's why I don't understand the people complaining about it being 7 years since the Sox were last in the playoffs, so trade Chris Sale. That suggests waiting another 7.

 

you make a great point but for me, it goes back to spending money wisely, while trying to build up your foundation to succeed. in other words, make it the same mandatory effort in getting players to field the team and build up your farm system.

 

maybe it is a lot to ask for the FO but i believe it can be done.

[LDF]

According to the last Business of Baseball by Forbes, the White Sox were 20th in MLB in total revenues. 20th is also where the White Sox finished in overall record this year. 1 team that finished behind them in total revenue made the playoffs this year. 9 of the 19 teams in front of them made it. 5 of the top 10 teams in total revenue from the 2015 list made the playoffs.

 

there is more to that than what you are just skimming. ref the forbes and i been doing more reading on that. the biggest difference i found and i do not have the link here with me at home, but it is at work. i am home b/c of surgery to my foot. so it may take me till monday to get it.

 

but as i was saying the big difference in this valuations is the definitions of certain things and what can be claimed.

 

cost of goods is not claim nor is the cog's revenue.

the sub contract companies that is claimed.

rental of the concessions is not claimed.

 

all these little things that adds up to the final tally of what is profit is not taken into the forbe article.

 

believe you me on this. as the primary board members by vote of the board is JR and his personal wealth is 1.2 to 1.3 billion dollars.

 

so saying that the team in general does not have the resources is really not a true statement.

[LDF]

How about I choose both? A WS win and a sustained run of success?

 

This WS title is gonna end up being a curse to the franchise with fans thinking like you.

 

i think it will be a curse only b/c the fans finally got their wish. a WS, and the fans knows it can be done and they want more.

[Eminor3rd]

It is getting better. Unlike the free agent market, these things aren't immediately obvious.

 

Good signs

-The Sox put multiple minor leaguers who were drafted/originally signed and developed by the team, into key roles and had some levels of success. Chances are somewhere between 1 and 3 starters of the position players will be guys fully developed by the organization. While not great, it is an improvement.

-The Sox have put something over $10 million into Latin America over the last 4 years or so, and those players are starting to show up state side.

-The highest rated position players are still moving through the system, and will be here soon.

-The team has added a ton of talent to the system in the last few years through the draft.

-Despite the amount of players that have graduated from being rankable, the system ranking is steadily moving upwards.

 

I agree with you. General consensus seems to be that the Sox buried themselves for the next few years by "going for it" in 2015, but I don't think that's the case at all. I liked the moves they made almost solely because they DIDN'T bury themselves. Offering high dollar/low years free agent contracts, trading only mid-tier prospects exclusively from positions of depth, and continually increasing (or at least maintaining) investment levels in amateur talent despite the ML payroll increase are about the best possible strategies for building a sustained winner without nuking the entire system and turning Bridgeport into a post-apocalyptic wasteland for five years in the process.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Eminor3rd

[LDF]

I'm inclined to agree, I think people overrate titles, especially in a sport as random as baseball. The Tigers/White Sox question is a good one, and since we've been so starved for baseball championships in this city people would lean towards the title, but in most cases I'd lean towards the Tigers here.

 

For another example, in my opinion the Braves making the playoffs 14 years in a row and only having 1 title to show for it >>>>>>>> Marlins winning 2 titles randomly and sucking the rest of the time.

 

the marlins way of doing it is a whole different lion in sheep clothing.

 

but for me, winning the WS title is the best, b/c of the yrs of the last one in the chi land area, i am including both chi baseball team.

 

all these yrs of the sox playing second fiddle to the north side in baseball and for me, since the 1960's.

 

now that the first one is taken care off. who knows how i would deal with it.

[Thad Bosley]

If in October of 2005, you had the choice of the White Sox winning the WS and having the next decade go like it has gone, or losing the WS and duplicating the Tigers since then with a WS appearance, and plenty of playoff appearances, but no wins, what do you choose?

I'll take Option C, which you didn't offer up but I'm taking it anyway, which is to have that wonderful WS championship experience of '05, AND take advantage of the new playoff system of recent years and maybe have had 2-3 more playoff appearances since '05 as well. Now I'm not greedy, mind you - I'm not saying I expected 2-3 more WS championships. That would, of course, be silly. But just step into that postseason more frequently than we have so we can have some freakin' FUN, for chrissakes. It is NOT fun to have to watch as many meaningless games in our empty ballpark in September and then NONE in October like we've had to do for practically the last decade.

 

So it's not an either/or proposition, the Sox' experience of the past decade vs. that of the Tigers. I'll take the '05 experience, with just a little more white sock waving opportunities in October than we've been provided in the last decade. I don't think that's too much to ask!