cost/benefit analysis for the Chicago white sox

[Whisox05]

http://southsideshowdown.com/2015/12/14/co...-the-white-sox/

 

Breaks down this season and future ones. Adds in what would happen for sox getting Frazier and upton.

[Dunt]

http://southsideshowdown.com/2015/12/14/co...-the-white-sox/

 

Breaks down this season and future ones. Adds in what would happen for sox getting Frazier and upton.

 

Nice write up. You put a lot of work into that.

[chitownsportsfan]

Forward this to JR.

[Saufley]

Forward this to JR.

 

I'm all in! Nice work!!

 

[Chisoxfn]

Interesting premise but inherently flawed premise to assume you make the playoffs all those years. I think you need to look at the upside and potential downside to better argue why economically it makes sense. I also presume an off-season ago you could have ran this same model with Melky / Robertson / LaRoche and projected playoffs too (doesn't mean you are right). I do agree that on paper if you go with Upton and another above average player (Frazier or someone else) than you are talking about potential playoff team.

 

Same could be said if you went after Upton and say Kendrick.

[Chicago White Sox]

While some of the logic may be flawed, the underlying principle is what's important. The ownership group must invest in the team now if it's wants to acheive sustainable success. They need to stop blaming the fans for not coming out and supporting a garbage product. Successful organizations (in any line of business) don't blame the consumer for their financial issues, they find a way to invest in their product to generate value. Therefore, spend some money and add an impact free agent or two; go into the red for a few years if need be. Put a quality product on the field for an extended period of time (i.e. more than one year) and the fans & revenue will follow. Half-assing it like we do most years is the worst possible decision we can make. We need a clear direction and if "going for it" isn't a feasible option, then start selling pieces and start from scratch.

[Chisoxfn]

While some of the logic may be flawed, the underlying principle is what's important. The ownership group must invest in the team now if it's wants to acheive sustainable success. They need to stop blaming the fans for not coming out and supporting a garbage product. Successful organizations (in any line of business) don't blame the consumer for their financial issues, they find a way to invest in their product to generate value. Therefore, spend some money and add an impact free agent or two; go into the red for a few years if need be. Put a quality product on the field for an extended period of time (i.e. more than one year) and the fans & revenue will follow. Half-assing it like we do most years is the worst possible decision we can make. We need a clear direction and if "going for it" isn't a feasible option, then start selling pieces and start from scratch.

I agree with everything you said and I think right now, they haven't pigeon holed themselves to one direction vs. the other yet. What they can't do is the status quo or even worse move assets for a half assed contention. Either contend or retool with a longer term plan. That could mean you sign a big name and focus on turning some assets for the future or that just fit better.

[LDF]

I agree with everything you said and I think right now, they haven't pigeon holed themselves to one direction vs. the other yet. What they can't do is the status quo or even worse move assets for a half assed contention. Either contend or retool with a longer term plan. That could mean you sign a big name and focus on turning some assets for the future or that just fit better.

 

they the owners can't afford to do that and yes, i said afford. b/c if they do a total rebuild, the sox will loose what ever their market in the media attraction of chi is. now also imagine the lost in more fans, the season tickets will plummet as will all the advertising they have left.

 

they, the owners really need to step up and really invest what will be needed to fix this screwed up situation that, thru their neglect have put this team in.

[iamshack]

But there are several ways to achieve profitability - this is just one of them.

 

They could also go the Astros route/KC route.

 

Or they could go the Marlins route.

 

And to be honest, from a cost-benefit perspective, that is clearly the safer way to go about it, because revenue sharing pretty much guarantees them a profit no matter what they put on the field.

[LDF]

But there are several ways to achieve profitability - this is just one of them.

 

They could also go the Astros route/KC route.

 

Or they could go the Marlins route.

 

And to be honest, from a cost-benefit perspective, that is clearly the safer way to go about it, because revenue sharing pretty much guarantees them a profit no matter what they put on the field.

 

ummm never thought of this, this way.

[Dam8610]

I love the write up and the positivity, but it seems a tad unrealistic. I can see an 85-90 win team in 2016, but the 2017 outlook is positively sparkling, and in fact perfect timing for the "incredible free agent class of 2018", which the White Sox could use their newfound success and payroll flexibility to buttress their position as a playoff contender and potentially push themselves into the ranks (and payroll levels) of the big market teams that have the ability to buy prolonged success. It all sounds fantastic, but the premises on which it's based are a bit too good to be true.

 

That said, I'm all for making those additions provided they can be made in the ways you suggest, because that would likely be a playoff team in 2016. I have my doubts as to the rest, but I think those additions along with the positive regression you mentioned and the additions already made this offseason would likely put this team in the playoffs.

[caulfield12]

About the only time we made moves that (supposedly) didn't make us sure-fire playoff contenders were pre-2000, 2005, 2008, 2010 and 2012.

 

There was a lot of skepticism before each of those seasons, especially with getting rid of fan favorites in Valentin, Ordonez and Lee (of course, they'd already added Garcia and Contreras in 2004) and adding a huge collection of unknown quantities/rehabbing players/Iguchi/AJ, etc.

 

It's almost impossible to be optimistic after seeing the Dunn 2011 fiasco and what happened in April and May after all the optimism and positive puff pieces last off-season.

Edited December 15, 2015 by caulfield12

[WBWSF]

This is certainly one of the most interesting articles I have ever read about the White Sox franchise. That being said lets hope JR goes out and gets a couple of good hitters before Opening Day 2016. I don't want another season of bad baseball on the South Side like we've seen the last 3 years.

[caulfield12]

1) Doesn't take into account ticket subsidies that kick in at lower attendance levels.

 

2) Doesn't fully consider opportunity cost of lost Samardzija pick and loss of talent for Frazier...as well as impact of being forced to trade two of Sanchez, Saladino and Micah when Lawrie is pushed to 2b. Doesn't consider possibility of those traded players being a part of core in 2016-2021.

 

Or replacing Cabrera, Lawrie and Frazier after 2017, as well as a new catcher before that season.

 

3) Doesn't fully consider injury possibilities with Melky, Frazier, Avila, Lawrie, Eaton, Sale, Q, Rodon and Abreu.

 

4) Doesn't consider higher revenue sharing percentages that strongly benefit teams like the Marlins...the flipside possibility of being even more profitable with a teardown.

 

5) Should also include something about impact on 2019-2020 media rights negotiations...although a teardown now could also lead to very competitive teams in 2018 and 2019 depending on the maximized talent/trade acquisitions being made.

Edited December 15, 2015 by caulfield12

[NorthSideSox72]

There are some problems in the model, and the assumptions, as well as the incomplete picture on some revenue streams. But still a good, thought-provoking article. Nice work.

 

[LDF]

1) Doesn't take into account ticket subsidies that kick in at lower attendance levels.

 

2) Doesn't fully consider opportunity cost of lost Samardzija pick and loss of talent for Frazier...as well as impact of being forced to trade two of Sanchez, Saladino and Micah when Lawrie is pushed to 2b. Doesn't consider possibility of those traded players being a part of core in 2016-2021.

 

Or replacing Cabrera, Lawrie and Frazier after 2017, as well as a new catcher before that season.

 

3) Doesn't fully consider injury possibilities with Melky, Frazier, Avila, Lawrie, Eaton, Sale, Q, Rodon and Abreu.

 

4) Doesn't consider higher revenue sharing percentages that strongly benefit teams like the Marlins...the flipside possibility of being even more profitable with a teardown.

 

5) Should also include something about impact on 2019-2020 media rights negotiations...although a teardown now could also lead to very competitive teams in 2018 and 2019 depending on the maximized talent/trade acquisitions being made.

 

you make a good point, but remember, no one outside their acct will know the whole financial numbers. this also includes forbe's who in my opinion comes the closest. this past yr, researching the profit and lost of a baseball org, it all depends on who they will massage the numbers. whether they want to include all in 1 particular calendar yr or will they go with the baseball fiscal yr.

 

also all the other money that is made by other sub companies.

 

that is why these corp acct makes huge money, to find the loop holes that the baseball org can exploit, legally.