Fire everyone

[Dick Allen]

While it would be a different game, I don't think there's any reason to believe it would be a game with "more competitive balance" or a "better game overall" or even a "better league for small market teams" based on the results of the last decade.

For the small market teams to be successful, they generally have to be bad for a longer period of time., and their windows are probably smaller.Could you imagine Boston or the Yankees stinking it up for 20 plus years like the Pirates or Royals?

 

Slotting and draft pools have at least made the draft pretty fair. Although many teams blow through their international allotment, a loophole I believe needs to be shut.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Dick Allen

[LVSoxFan]

For what its worth, I have been told by a few folks who have worked for the Sox that money is actually the least concern. They are making it...a lot of it. JR's business philosophy has always been and he's never hid this, he's said it publicly, that he refuses to pay top dollar for managers / head coaches and he refuses to pay for unproven talent. (Which is perhaps why the Sox minor league system has been poor for at least 15 years.)

 

You can agree or disagree with that attitude.

 

What I'm saying is, if JR actually wanted to he could have a 140-150 million dollar payroll with no trouble.

 

It's a matter of choice.

 

MLB operates one way, JR another. That's his right...but its clearly not working that well.

 

This comes back to something I and others have noted. JR wants to win, but he wants to win, HIS WAY.

 

Mark

 

That actually makes sense, but at what point does he realize that "his way" doesn't work?

 

The more this goes on the more I wonder if the relatively instant success of 2005 (in that they had just hired Ozzie the year before and gone all-in on the "smartball" approach and boom! World Series win after 88 years) convinced KW and JR that "their way" is genius. And that would be understandable, had it sustained itself.

 

But here we are 11 years later with exactly one playoff appearance to show for it (which was a no-contest, first-round exit) and we've basically replaced KC as the Comedy Central bottom-feeder year after year. Hell you can't even call it the Comedy Central anymore with teams like Detroit, Cleveland and current WS champion KC).

 

What I'm not seeing here is... a learning curve.

 

[Balta1701]

For the small market teams to be successful, they generally have to be bad for a longer period of time., and their windows are probably smaller.Could you imagine Boston or the Yankees stinking it up for 20 plus years like the Pirates or Royals?

 

Slotting and draft pools have at least made the draft pretty fair. Although many teams blow through their international allotment, a loophole I believe needs to be shut.

Like I noted in the other thread it shouldn't take a team 20 years to rebuild even if they have an extremely weak farm system. It can take half a decade yes, but if your org can't recover in a 5-ish year period then your org is completely f***ed up and you don't get sympathy from me.

[Dick Allen]

Like I noted in the other thread it shouldn't take a team 20 years to rebuild even if they have an extremely weak farm system. It can take half a decade yes, but if your org can't recover in a 5-ish year period then your org is completely f***ed up and you don't get sympathy from me.

The problem is you don't have 10 years, you have 4 or 5 or 6 if you are small market because once your guys get to free agency, you have to start again. You can trade them for more prospects sooner, but it's like throwing water off of a boat with a bucket. You're just buying time.

[ptatc]

If the salary money isn't allocated properly, it really isn't.

 

Part of it is the money is and has been spent on players who weren't that good. Dunn, LaRoche and Danks come to mind.

 

How about the money paid to Jeff Keppinger a guy the Sox signed and paid with a bum shoulder?

 

Mark

Correct. So when he said that it's primarily JR's fault, I would disagree. The is money being spent. How it is being spent is the issue. So is it JR or front office?

[ptatc]

The sox strategy of being a lower-half payroll team that will stay competitive through free agency signings doesn't seem like a strategy anyone would advise. But here we are.

They aren't lower half. The 25 man roster ranks 8th in salary.

[ptatc]

And regarding the salary cap issue. As long as the MLBPA is among the strongest unions in the world MLB will NEVER have a salary cap.

 

I've very confident making that statement.

 

So either you learn to live with it, adapt, spend money and succeed or you swim against the current, consistently lose and alienate your fan base.

 

It's simply a matter of choice although I understand there are many more factors, stadium lease, concession / parking revenue, MLB as a whole almost literally printing money today with all the revenue streams. Frankly the desire to actually win among some owners may not be all that strong anymore.

 

Mark

I agree here as well. hence, JR telling his heirs that keeping the Bulls is the better option.

[Lip Man 1]

That actually makes sense, but at what point does he realize that "his way" doesn't work?

 

The more this goes on the more I wonder if the relatively instant success of 2005 (in that they had just hired Ozzie the year before and gone all-in on the "smartball" approach and boom! World Series win after 88 years) convinced KW and JR that "their way" is genius. And that would be understandable, had it sustained itself.

 

But here we are 11 years later with exactly one playoff appearance to show for it (which was a no-contest, first-round exit) and we've basically replaced KC as the Comedy Central bottom-feeder year after year. Hell you can't even call it the Comedy Central anymore with teams like Detroit, Cleveland and current WS champion KC).

 

What I'm not seeing here is... a learning curve.

 

Historically though that philosophy has been in place almost from the start as at the first press conference EE said (paraphrasing) 'the way to win is with trades and free agent signings not the minor league system.' And that certainly worked early in the 80's when the Sox spent a lot of money and had a guy like Roland Hemond around to execute it pretty well as G.M.

 

Mark

 

[Lip Man 1]

Correct. So when he said that it's primarily JR's fault, I would disagree. The is money being spent. How it is being spent is the issue. So is it JR or front office?

 

In my opinion a little of both.

 

But Kenny to me is the single biggest issue with this organization.

 

Mark

 

[southsider2k5]

The problem is you don't have 10 years, you have 4 or 5 or 6 if you are small market because once your guys get to free agency, you have to start again. You can trade them for more prospects sooner, but it's like throwing water off of a boat with a bucket. You're just buying time.

 

And with the fan base, you don't have a lot of patience for rebuilding.

[ptatc]

In my opinion a little of both.

 

But Kenny to me is the single biggest issue with this organization.

 

Mark

I would disagree with JR as they have spent money just not allocated it well. KW isn't the current GM he still has oversight but he focuses more on scouting than being the day to day GM. The one to look at is Hahn. Have his moves since he has been GM been good? The results sure haven't. however, by public perception if Hahn goes KW will need to as well because he will still be the fans scapegoat.

[Iwritecode]

Historically though that philosophy has been in place almost from the start as at the first press conference EE said (paraphrasing) 'the way to win is with trades and free agent signings not the minor league system.' And that certainly worked early in the 80's when the Sox spent a lot of money and had a guy like Roland Hemond around to execute it pretty well as G.M.

 

Mark

 

One division title and a single playoff win isn't exactly what I would call winning baseball.

[Black_Jack29]

And with the fan base, you don't have a lot of patience for rebuilding.

 

The flip side of that argument is that if you're not winning, they're not showing up anyway. So why not do a full rebuild and take the short-term attendance hit? The Sox survived the late '80s and late '90s, and I don't see why they can't do it again.

 

Edited June 8, 2016 by Black_Jack29

[southsider2k5]

The flip side of that argument is that if you're not winning, they're not showing up anyway. So why not do a full rebuild and take the short-term attendance hit? The Sox survived the late '80s and late '90s, and I don't see why they can't do it again.

 

Looking at that era of numbers tells me that it won't be short term, and it won't be small. Especially if they fail at all in the rebuild, of which I have zero faith in them being able to do.

[Black_Jack29]

Looking at that era of numbers tells me that it won't be short term, and it won't be small. Especially if they fail at all in the rebuild, of which I have zero faith in them being able to do.

 

I honestly don't see how the organization is going to be worse off financially drawing 24k per game with a $125M payroll vs. drawing 17k per game with an $85M payroll.

 

The Sox are going to be forced to start over in the next 2-3 years anyway, when the contracts of Sale, Quintana, Robertson, Frazier, Abreu, Lawrie, etc. lapse. Selling some of those guys off to the highest bidder in 2018 and 2019 makes more sense than letting them walk as free agents and getting comp picks in return. So starting over is more of a question of when vs. a question of if.

 

[Balta1701]

I honestly don't see how the organization is going to be worse off financially drawing 24k per game with a $125M payroll vs. drawing 17k per game with an $85M payroll.

 

The Sox are going to be forced to start over in the next 2-3 years anyway, when the contracts of Sale, Quintana, Robertson, Frazier, Abreu, Lawrie, etc. lapse. Selling some of those guys off to the highest bidder in 2018 and 2019 makes more sense than letting them walk as free agents and getting comp picks in return. So starting over is more of a question of when vs. a question of if.

They haven't drawn 24k a game since 2012. Just under 20k/game so far this year.

[caulfield12]

http://www.businessinsider.com/major-leagu...payrolls-2016-4

 

The White Sox are 16th as of Opening Day in payroll.

 

Statistically, the odds of making it to the playoffs if you're not in the top half are QUITE significant. Even if it's only by ONE place.

[soxforlife05]

What the organization needs is a top to bottom house cleaning. Senior executives, scouting, minors, majors, ownership, players. It's anybody's guess how much longer JR will live so we could be looking at another 10-20 years of this garbage. Hopefully the team won't be on the verge of moving by that point.

 

And when the fire sale happens in 2-3 years, please get some great minor league talent evaluators in place. This staff has whiffed quite a bit as of late.

Edited June 8, 2016 by soxforlife05

[Black_Jack29]

They haven't drawn 24k a game since 2012. Just under 20k/game so far this year.

 

School got out just recently. It'll go up a little bit if they're in the hunt.

 

[Lip Man 1]

And with the fan base, you don't have a lot of patience for rebuilding.

 

That may be true but honestly given the past nine (soon to be ten) seasons I wonder if that opinion remains in play.

 

There may be more fans now willing to 'blow it up' and start over of course with a different front office making the decisions.

 

Mark

[southsider2k5]

That may be true but honestly given the past nine (soon to be ten) seasons I wonder if that opinion remains in play.

 

There may be more fans now willing to 'blow it up' and start over of course with a different front office making the decisions.

 

Mark

 

Willing as in paying to go see a 55 win team? Yeah, I don't buy that for a second. I would bet you money that if the Sox really did a full and announced fire sale, attendance would drop by at least double digits percent.

[Lip Man 1]

One division title and a single playoff win isn't exactly what I would call winning baseball.

 

You misunderstand I'm saying the philosophy of ignoring the minor leagues in favor of trades and free agent signings was the philosophy and there is some evidence it remains so to this day.

 

People forget in the first three seasons of operations the Sox brought in Fisk, Luzinski, Kemp, Paciorek, Cruz and Bannister.

 

That worked out pretty well especially given what the time period from 1968-1980 looked like.

 

That plan was derailed by two things, one JR suddenly realizing how much it cost to win. He publicly said that after 83 when the players were wanting raises and of course collusion starting in 1985.

 

Mark

 

 

[Texsox]

That may be true but honestly given the past nine (soon to be ten) seasons I wonder if that opinion remains in play.

 

There may be more fans now willing to 'blow it up' and start over of course with a different front office making the decisions.

 

Mark

 

I believe you have to look at the fans in groups. A lot of people buy tickets and go a baseball game or two during the year. They may go to the Sox or they may go to the Cubs, or Kane County, it really doesn't matter to them. They just like the show. We may pejoratively label them as fair weather fans, but I think of them more like movie goers. They may like a certain actor, but they also just enjoy going to a movie. You lose those ticket buyer with any rebuilding. The hard core fan base, the season ticket holders, and probably a lot of people here, are more willing to sit through a rebuilding. But many posters here could actually name the Sox affiliates and a few of the players.

[Lip Man 1]

Willing as in paying to go see a 55 win team? Yeah, I don't buy that for a second. I would bet you money that if the Sox really did a full and announced fire sale, attendance would drop by at least double digits percent.

 

Well they lost (until the end of last season when attendance went up a bit) eight consecutive years attendance from the previous year (a franchise record by the way). With the revenue streams and the money being made by MLB (Selig before he left said MLB was now a nine Billion dollar industry - that's NFL territory) I don't think the Sox would suffer that much if attendance dropped by the percentage you indicated.

 

Look at it this way.

 

At the end of the 2006 season they drew 2,957,414.

At the end of the 2015 season they drew 1,755,810 (an increase of about 200,000 from 2014)

 

That's a significant drop right there...and they've survived.

 

Mark

[southsider2k5]

Well they lost (until the end of last season when attendance went up a bit) eight consecutive years attendance from the previous year (a franchise record by the way). With the revenue streams and the money being made by MLB (Selig before he left said MLB was now a nine Billion dollar industry - that's NFL territory) I don't think the Sox would suffer that much if attendance dropped by the percentage you indicated.

 

Look at it this way.

 

At the end of the 2006 season they drew 2,957,414.

At the end of the 2015 season they drew 1,755,810 (an increase of about 200,000 from 2014)

 

That's a significant drop right there...and they've survived.

 

Mark

 

There is a big difference behind an erosion, and a huge hit to the fan base, ala White Flag.

 

White Sox fans are a bitter lot, and would absolutely flee in droves over another massive sell off.

 

Think more like 1997 to 1998.