Fire everyone

[LittleHurt05]

Never said that. I do think he is similar to Joe Torre. Check out Torre's managerial record before he had top of the line rosters.

 

Sorry, my bad.

 

Robin Ventura = Joe Torre

 

#HotTakesbyDickAllen

 

 

I'd join in the discussion if you actually thought that was true, but I know you don't, it's just the way you are choosing to attack the board today.

[flavum]

All you need to know about Robin Ventura is that he never aspired to be a manager, his teams have been terrible under his tenure, and he'll never interview for a managerial job ever again, let alone manage a big league game after this season. He's in a class by himself for the only franchise that would go this way for this long.

[witesoxfan]

Ventura has had his opportunity. This offseason he should be replaced. It may only result in a couple three more wins but it is the accumulation of all of those small improvements that make the difference. I believe he could be a very good to great manager in the right position. This just isn't the right time nor position.

 

This is the time to make a move. If you fail to make the playoffs again this year, or so any significant improvement whatsoever, then you replace him in the offseason when you can actually do the full fledged interview process.

 

What the hell is a managerial change going to do right now? For every Jack McKeon in Florida, there are 100 Luis Pujols's.

[Dick Allen]

The Sox either traded or let some really good players walk between 1995 and 1998. The organization suffered in the short-term, but were better off in the long-term (beginning in 2000). If the Sox are mired in mediocrity next July, I could see them trading a few key players for young, ML-ready talent and doing a proper rebuild around their better young players. Given this organization's past, I don't see them continuing on the current path indefinitely. If JR decides to sell the team in the foreseeable future, he'll definitely dump the higher-salaried players to maximize the organization's value.

For some reason I was looking at the stats for the 1999 White Sox a couple of weeks ago. I think they won 76 games in a rebuilding year. The fascinating thing about them was they had a solid offensive team. A different era, but Carlos Lee was a rookie and he was 8th on the team with a .775 OPS. Greg Norton isn't remembered fondly, but he had an OPS over .780. They had 6 regulars over .800.

[witesoxfan]

All you need to know about Robin Ventura is that he never aspired to be a manager, his teams have been terrible under his tenure, and he'll never interview for a managerial job ever again, let alone manage a big league game after this season. He's in a class by himself for the only franchise that would go this way for this long.

 

I hope you know how to spend his retirement for him too.

[flavum]

I hope you know how to spend his retirement for him too.

 

If he ever interviews for a managerial job after this season, I'll start a new thread and call myself out. We all know this will be it for him.

[ptatc]

This is so depressing but it is likely true. From what I'm hearing, when JR passes, he told his family to sell the White Sox and hold on to the Chicago Bulls. FWIW. Apart of me really wants JR to win one more title before the Cubs get theirs, unfortunately the Cubs are much closer than we are. How did they get there? The new owner made some bold moves and brought in a GM who made the bold decision to tank for 4+ seasons in an attempt to replenish the team with young talent and right now they are enjoying the fruits of that hardship. It pains me to say, Reinsdorf does not have it in him to make these type of bold moves. I'm not saying-- let's lose for 4+ seasons to build up the farm. However, when your front office tries over and over again to patch up the team via trades, middle of the pack free agency signings and continuously neglects the farm, why should we even expect to see different results? This lightning in a bottle method needs to end. The problems of this team goes well beyond Robin (who i dislike as a manager). The problem of this team is a true lack of direction. In 2013-14 I saw the promise of a team actually acquiring young talent and they put a premium on draft picks. Suddenly 2015 hit and instead of maintaining the course- they decided to prematurely GO FOR IT! Which meant the farm system once again took a back seat and the evidence on the field demonstrated that they were not even near ready for that yet. By the look of it this year, even with the additions of Frazier, Shields and Lawrie-- they are still not even close to where they want to be. They will be lucky to finish .500 this year. How much longer will they try this 'retooling' crap? I guess we can question their methods until the cows come home and crave change as much as want, unfortunately nothing will change with this team until that time where the Riensdorf family does sell to new ownership.

Because of the awful imbalance in the salary structure with no salary cap that makes it difficult for teams to compete with the "richest" owners. JR has said many times that it's mostly who spends the most money has the best chance of winning. He has fought against that for decades.

[witesoxfan]

If he ever interviews for a managerial job after this season, I'll start a new thread and call myself out. We all know this will be it for him.

 

I don't think that at all. I won't say you're being unreasonable, but I bet he'll stay in the game and that he'll interview for a job again at some point in his life.

[ptatc]

You are absolutely correct. The angst over the current stretch of losing is misplaced. Ventura is merely playing the hand he's been dealt. He's not the one who, in an attempt to "upgrade" several positions that contributed to the league's worst offense last year, went dumpster diving last winter to do so. Rollins, Jackson, Avila, and even Navarro were the results of dumpster diving by the front office. And not to mention, but Ventura was originally going to have to trot out LaRoche again, too, only to then be forced the need to employ one Avi Garcia instead.

 

So my frustration at this point lies more with Hahn, Williams, and You-Know-Who more so than Ventura. At the same time, as I mentioned earlier, managers are hired to be fired, so I do think he needs to go at this point. But that is only curing a symptom rather than the true root cause of what continues to ail the White Sox.

So what you're saying is that the 8th highest 25 man roster isn't good enough to compete?

[Dick Allen]

All you need to know about Robin Ventura is that he never aspired to be a manager, his teams have been terrible under his tenure, and he'll never interview for a managerial job ever again, let alone manage a big league game after this season. He's in a class by himself for the only franchise that would go this way for this long.

49-68

66-96

63-99

67-95

41-62

 

Joe Torre's first 5 years as a manager with the Mets. He was hired the next season to manage Atlanta.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Bigsoxhurt35]

49-68

66-96

63-99

67-95

41-62

 

Joe Torre's first 5 years as a manager with the Mets.

Stop it

[southsider2k5]

This is the time to make a move. If you fail to make the playoffs again this year, or so any significant improvement whatsoever, then you replace him in the offseason when you can actually do the full fledged interview process.

 

What the hell is a managerial change going to do right now? For every Jack McKeon in Florida, there are 100 Luis Pujols's.

 

Yeah, I am not usually a firings kind of guy, but if you are going to, the time is pretty much right now. If you let the season get away from you too much more, you will miss out on the window to get back into it. At that point you leave him here to tank the season anyway.

[Balta1701]

Because of the awful imbalance in the salary structure with no salary cap that makes it difficult for teams to compete with the "richest" owners. JR has said many times that it's mostly who spends the most money has the best chance of winning. He has fought against that for decades.

But by fighting against that, JRs made this league reach a state where teams that don't have the highest payroll regularly make the playoffs and win the world series. MLB has, thanks to the structure they've built, much more turnover in their playoff teams and much better competitive balance than happens in the other 2 major sports (I don't remember if I've seen similar numbers for Hockey or not). The big market teams have something of an advantage, but the world series winner has been a top 5 payroll team only 3 times out of the last 10 years.

 

It's an obstacle, if you're a team like the Padres or D-Backs or Orioles or Rays you can't make bad decisions because those high payroll teams will be in the way, but it's no where near an obstacle that can't be overcome.

[flavum]

Stop it

 

Different time. Different era. Different economic system. Different expectations. Different person.

 

Different.

[ptatc]

But by fighting against that, JRs made this league reach a state where teams that don't have the highest payroll regularly make the playoffs and win the world series. MLB has, thanks to the structure they've built, much more turnover in their playoff teams and much better competitive balance than happens in the other 2 major sports (I don't remember if I've seen similar numbers for Hockey or not). The big market teams have something of an advantage, but the world series winner has been a top 5 payroll team only 3 times out of the last 10 years.

 

It's an obstacle, if you're a team like the Padres or D-Backs or Orioles or Rays you can't make bad decisions because those high payroll teams will be in the way, but it's no where near an obstacle that can't be overcome.

It's still not as effective as leagues with a salary cap.

 

Anyway the point was the poster was trying to make it sound like JR wanted his heirs to sell the Sox and keep the Bulls because he doesn't care about the Sox as much. Which is actually the opposite because of the huge baseball fan he is. The true reason he told them to keep the Bulls is 1. He actually owns the Bulls whereas he owns a small portion of the sox and 2. It's much easier to compete in the NBA due to the salary cap structure.

[Dick Allen]

Stop it

61-101

66-96

 

Joe Maddon's first 2 years. Why did they let him continue?

 

 

69-93

66-94

81-80

50-56

78-84

 

Bobby Cox's first 5 seasons. Who else would ever even interview him? Loser.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Dick Allen]

It's still not as effective as leagues with a salary cap.

 

Anyway the point was the poster was trying to make it sound like JR wanted his heirs to sell the Sox and keep the Bulls because he doesn't care about the Sox as much. Which is actually the opposite because of the huge baseball fan he is. The true reason he told them to keep the Bulls is 1. He actually owns the Bulls whereas he owns a small portion of the sox and 2. It's much easier to compete in the NBA due to the salary cap structure.

It's more fool proof as well. You would really have to be the Nets owner not to make money running the Bulls. As to the White Sox, I know someone who knows JR's son pretty well. From what he told me, I wouldn't expect a sale if they still have the team when JR departs.

[Balta1701]

It's still not as effective as leagues with a salary cap.

 

Anyway the point was the poster was trying to make it sound like JR wanted his heirs to sell the Sox and keep the Bulls because he doesn't care about the Sox as much. Which is actually the opposite because of the huge baseball fan he is. The true reason he told them to keep the Bulls is 1. He actually owns the Bulls whereas he owns a small portion of the sox and 2. It's much easier to compete in the NBA due to the salary cap structure.

I really do disagree. Take a look here - the leagues with the salary caps at best have "as much" competitive balance as MLB and in many ways MLB has more. MLB has more teams with titles in the past 10 years, similar numbers of teams finishing in the top 2, top 4, and top 8 (NBA top 4 almost never turns over). Each league has 4-7 franchises that haven't had a top 8 finish in a decade.

 

MLB's system may not be as "effective" as a salary cap, but because of the way the draft and development system works in MLB and how random it is, and how bad of an investment the FA market is, teams can get around the money if they manage their org correctly.

[bmags]

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.

[Lip Man 1]

Because of the awful imbalance in the salary structure with no salary cap that makes it difficult for teams to compete with the "richest" owners. JR has said many times that it's mostly who spends the most money has the best chance of winning. He has fought against that for decades.

 

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

[Dick Allen]

I really do disagree. Take a look here - the leagues with the salary caps at best have "as much" competitive balance as MLB and in many ways MLB has more. MLB has more teams with titles in the past 10 years, similar numbers of teams finishing in the top 2, top 4, and top 8 (NBA top 4 almost never turns over). Each league has 4-7 franchises that haven't had a top 8 finish in a decade.

 

MLB's system may not be as "effective" as a salary cap, but because of the way the draft and development system works in MLB and how random it is, and how bad of an investment the FA market is, teams can get around the money if they manage their org correctly.

NBA vs. MLB is totally different. NBA has and always will be more easily prognosticated than any other sport. Especially in the playoffs. The best team wins more often. In baseball, with the change in the guy on the mound, you basically feature a different most games in a series. That's why around .500 is NBA hell but not NHL or NFL or MLB hell. A break here or there and you contend. Not in the NBA.

[Lip Man 1]

So what you're saying is that the 8th highest 25 man roster isn't good enough to compete?

 

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

 

[Lip Man 1]

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

[Dick Allen]

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

Unless you are operating a shoestring budget, there is going to be a lot of dead money paid out. Some people don't like the fact the Sox will be paying James Shields $27 million to pitch the next 2 1/2 years. Theo was able to give Edwin Jackson $26 million to stink up the joint for 2 years, and another $26 million for 2 more to pitch for other teams, all the while having $150 million for Lester, $200 million for Heyward and a bunch of money to Lackey and Zobrist.

 

 

I do agree with you, we are nowhere near a baseball salary cap and may never be near one, but it would be an entirely different game if there happened to be one.

 

Andrew Freidman was pretty good with no money in TB, and many assumed it may even be unfair when he had access to all the Dodger money, but like KW, it seems he may be more shrewd the less money he gets to spend.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Balta1701]

Unless you are operating a shoestring budget, there is going to be a lot of dead money paid out. Some people don't like the fact the Sox will be paying James Shields $27 million to pitch the next 2 1/2 years. Theo was able to give Edwin Jackson $26 million to stink up the joint for 2 years, and another $26 million for 2 more to pitch for other teams, all the while having $150 million for Lester, $200 million for Heyward and a bunch of money to Lackey and Zobrist.

 

 

I do agree with you, we are nowhere near a baseball salary cap and may never be near one, but it would be an entirely different game if there happened to be one.

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.