PDA

View Full Version : Hahn, Robin, Parent On Team...


Lip Man 1
06-03-2013, 11:46 AM
Has specific comments on areas like trades, fundamentals and lack of enthusiasm. Pretty good read.

Sounds like those guys are pissed. Now whether they can do something about it is another story:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/20501006-419/ventura-has-meetings-with-individual-sox.html

Lip

Bobby Thigpen
06-03-2013, 12:13 PM
I thought you didn't care?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=138187

Madvora
06-03-2013, 12:25 PM
When bad contracts and money force a team to play somebody who clearly doesn't even belong in the major leagues anymore, it's no surprise that fans lose interest.

captain54
06-03-2013, 12:36 PM
Funny.. you see Kenny Williams all over the media outlets normally, .. lately you haven't heard a peep out of him... Come on out big man...

captain54
06-03-2013, 12:38 PM
I thought you didn't care?

[/url]

are YOU sitting riveted to the tube watching every pitch, every a/b?

Bobby Thigpen
06-03-2013, 12:54 PM
are YOU sitting riveted to the tube watching every pitch, every a/b?
No.

But I'm also not posting dozens of posts a day about the team either.

Rocky Soprano
06-03-2013, 12:58 PM
Funny.. you see Kenny Williams all over the media outlets normally, .. lately you haven't heard a peep out of him... Come on out big man...

Being that he is in a new role, I wouldn't expect him to be in the media anymore. I take that as he is letting Hahn be his own man.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 01:23 PM
Being that he is in a new role, I wouldn't expect him to be in the media anymore. I take that as he is letting Hahn be his own man.

Right, could there be anything more dysfunctional than the President of an organization undercutting his own GM?

captain54
06-03-2013, 01:28 PM
Right, could there be anything more dysfunctional than the President of an organization undercutting his own GM?

yes there could be.. shuffling the engineer of this trainwreck into another position of power within the organization

hawkjt
06-03-2013, 02:05 PM
Being that he is in a new role, I wouldn't expect him to be in the media anymore. I take that as he is letting Hahn be his own man.


Just like John Paxson disappeared shortly after Gar Foreman got the Bulls GM job.

It is a huge perk associated with being kicked upstairs...dealing with the media is the GM's job.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 02:36 PM
yes there could be.. shuffling the engineer of this trainwreck into another position of power within the organization

This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.

shingo10
06-03-2013, 02:46 PM
This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.


Great post and spot on.

Foulke You
06-03-2013, 03:14 PM
This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.
Excellent post.

captain54
06-03-2013, 03:34 PM
Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak.

Ok.. so no accountability whatsoever toward the former GM, gets a free pass.. Gotcha!!

Rocky Soprano
06-03-2013, 03:41 PM
Ok.. so no accountability whatsoever toward the former GM, gets a free pass.. Gotcha!!

Really? Did you even read the post?

Its easy to cherry pick all the bad but how about giving him some credit for the good?

cards press box
06-03-2013, 04:05 PM
This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.

I agree. And I also think that going forward, the Sox have more options than people think. Between Konerko, Floyd and Thornton, $27.5 million comes off the books in 2013. Dunn and Rios come off the books in 2014 -- that's another $27 million. Now, the Sox could probably deal Rios at the deadline in 2013 and get a very good prospect or two for him. The Mets are rumored to have interest in rios and they have some intriguing prospects in their system.

Let's say that the Sox deal Rios by the end of July and pick up a blue chip prospect or two for him. The Sox would then have around $40 million off the books for 2014 (and that is assuming that they can't move Adam Dunn, even if they absorbed part of his contract). With that $40 million, could they sign two outfielders, a catcher and first basemen from the 2014 free agent class? I think they could. And let's not forget, if they deal Rios to the Mets, maybe they acquire someone like top catching prospect Travis D'arnaud and then they wouldn't need to sign a catcher.

The Sox will be able to make some moves in the offseason and maybe before that. Let's hope that Hahn makes the right ones.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 04:15 PM
Ok.. so no accountability whatsoever toward the former GM, gets a free pass.. Gotcha!!

That's a pretty gross overexaggeration of what I said; it is possible to simultaneously be dissapointed in the Sox's on field performance for the past few months while still acknowledging that his time spent in the front office for this franchise has been extremely positive. Yes, it was time for KW to get away from running the team on a daily basis, but that doesn't automatically mean he's got nothing left to offer. This may come as a shock, but "holding people accountable" for their decisions doesn't automatically mean dropping the axe at the slightest provocation. That's generally not a great way to run a business or a sports team. The only team I can think that acts/acted that way in my lifetime were the late Al Davis years in Oakland, when he ran the Raiders into the ground. Clearly not the formula to emulate.

Look, I'm not saying you have to agree with my opinion, if you think the Sox should kick KW to the curb, that's perfectly valid and respectable. But only if you're willing to review the whole body of work honestly, otherwise you just come off as a bitter lunatic. I can fully admit that Ozzie was a great manager for his first few years in Chicago, but I still don't ever want him back because of the way he behaved toward the end of his tenure. People are rarely "all bad" or "all good."

captain54
06-03-2013, 04:25 PM
We will never agree because your definition of success and mine are worlds apart. You think a winning record is successful. I think one playoff appearance in 7 yrs from a big market franchise is not successful. You wanna focus on the positive and I find it alarming that we were embarrassed by the Flubs, are entering a dark phase in Sox history, with pretty much the glow of 05 vanished. Whatever

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:28 PM
Ok.. so no accountability whatsoever toward the former GM, gets a free pass.. Gotcha!!

Did he say that? No.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:33 PM
We will never agree because your definition of success and mine are worlds apart. You think a winning record is successful. I think one playoff appearance in 7 yrs from a big market franchise is not successful. You wanna focus on the positive and I find it alarming that we were embarrassed by the Flubs, are entering a dark phase in Sox history, with pretty much the glow of 05 vanished. Whatever

Don't put words in other people's mouths. I don't recall doublem23 saying anything of the sort. As far the White Sox are concerned, they have faced periods like this before. They will eventually come out of this: that Hahn and Ventura are at least considering wholesale changes indicates that they understand the seriousness of the situation and that they are prepared to correct the problems within the Sox organization. It won't happen overnight, however, so it's pointless to start threads every day whining about what the Sox aren't doing. It's going to take several seasons to rebuild the farm system and to acquire talent via trade to bolster the roster.

In the meantime, there's no reason why the Sox can't remain competitive in the American League Central. Do I equate a winning record with a successful season? Not necessarily, but if they're able to play solid baseball from this point forward, I certainly won't look at this season as a disappointment. Every year must be evaluated on its own: it's not fair to declare a season a success or failure because of what happened the previous season, or because of what happened eight years before. That the Sox won the World Series in 2005 has nothing to do with what's happening now, so I don't know why people keep bringing it up. As far as I'm concerned, the 2005 World Series became irrelevant as soon as 2005 was over.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 04:38 PM
We will never agree because your definition of success and mine are worlds apart. You think a winning record is successful. I think one playoff appearance in 7 yrs from a big market franchise is not successful. You wanna focus on the positive and I find it alarming that we were embarrassed by the Flubs, are entering a dark phase in Sox history, with pretty much the glow of 05 vanished. Whatever

That's fine, if you want to maintain such a ridiculously high standard of success, but mine are based on what is relative to the rest of the league. So please, do tell, how many teams out there would you say had a more sucessful run in KW's GM tenureship than the Sox? Obviously the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Cardinals, and Giants. That's 5 of 29 teams. Please, feel free to fill me in. Where are these other glorious streaks of championships across the Majors? Because I don't see them. Most teams exist like us, runs of good years and bad years and, hopefully, a year or two here when you get lucky, catch all the breaks, and win the whole thing. That's the reality for most baseball fans.

I find it alarming that the Sox are playing poorly, that it happened against the Cubs is nothing more than a coincidence. Those games don't mean anything more than a game against the Astros, Blue Jays, etc. You want to focus solely on the negative and apparently have no real concept of success or failure in baseball because I can guarantee you, at least 15, probably 20 other teams, would trade our last decade with theirs in a heartbeat. That that is a fact, and not opinion, is what you don't seem to comprehend. The Sox have been, more or less, pretty good lately.

captain54
06-03-2013, 04:42 PM
it's pointless to start threads every day whining about what the Sox aren't doing. .

In the overall scheme of things, its pointless to post ANY opinion on a fan message board because its not gonna change anything...

Hitmen77
06-03-2013, 04:43 PM
This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.

I agree with what you are saying, but it's been more than just a few bad months. IMO, Kenny's run as GM went downhill around 2008. Before this, he really had a knack for making winning trades for the Sox. But, in his last 5 years as GM, he didn't have nearly as much success as he did during his first 7 or 8 years as GM.

The other thing I bolded is something I have found intriguing. Indeed, the Sox had a good minor league system when he was in charge of minor league development, but that pretty much fell apart after he moved up to GM. What happened? Was it that he just did a poor job of hiring good people under him to succeed him in minor league development? I firmly believe the decline in the Sox minor league system over the last 10-12 years has lead us to the mess we're in now.

I really have no idea what KW's duties are in his new job. Whatever they are, I hope he has success in turning this team around.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:47 PM
In the overall scheme of things, its pointless to post ANY opinion on a fan message board because its not gonna change anything...

True, but that's hardly the point of having a forum in the first place.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 04:47 PM
Look, there's two seperate issues here:

1) Should KW still be working for the Sox? That I can't answer for anyone. That's a matter of opinion. I don't mind it; I don't want KW running the show as GM any more, but I think he's still a valuable asset to the organization's front office. But if someone were to come and say, "I think KW should have been fired," well, that's their opinion, which I respect.

2) Where the Sox relatively successful during KW's tenure? That is not an opinion. The answer to this is yes. Could the team have been more successful? Sure, they won 1 World Series title in 12 years. Could have won 11 more. But, there's a whole **** load of teams that didn't match that 1. That never got a chance. That didn't win nearly as regularly as the Sox did. These are numbers, not opinions. If you think the Sox blew a couple chances, could have been more successful, sure, I can see that. But you're still talking about a team that had a nice run of years, there.

Let's not get the two confused.

captain54
06-03-2013, 04:49 PM
That's fine, if you want to maintain such a ridiculously high standard of success,

I think getting to the playoffs every once in a while, consider now that there's a wild card and there has been for a while, is not asking too much.. That attendance has been steadily declining since 05 should speak to you, but apparently you read into things what you wanna read into them.. and that's your right..

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:49 PM
I agree with what you are saying, but it's been more than just a few bad months. IMO, Kenny's run as GM went downhill around 2008. Before this, he really had a knack for making winning trades for the Sox. But, in his last 5 years as GM, he didn't have nearly as much success as he did during his first 7 or 8 years as GM.

The other thing I bolded is something I have found intriguing. Indeed, the Sox had a good minor league system when he was in charge of minor league development, but that pretty much fell apart after he moved up to GM. What happened? Was it that he just did a poor job of hiring good people under him to succeed him in minor league development? I firmly believe the decline in the Sox minor league system over the last 10-12 years has lead us to the mess we're in now.

I really have no idea what KW's duties are in his new job. Whatever they are, I hope he has success in turning this team around.

You raise an interesting point: why not have Williams be more involved in rebuilding the farm system, since he was so successful there before? I don't mean that he should be demoted, but his current position within the organization shouldn't preclude him from having input into how areas of the organization that he's most familiar with are run on a day-to-day basis.

KingXerxes
06-03-2013, 04:52 PM
I find it alarming that the Sox are playing poorly, that it happened against the Cubs is nothing more than a coincidence. Those games don't mean anything more than a game against the Astros, Blue Jays, etc. You want to focus solely on the negative and apparently have no real concept of success or failure in baseball because I can guarantee you, at least 15, probably 20 other teams, would trade our last decade with theirs in a heartbeat. That that is a fact, and not opinion, is what you don't seem to comprehend. The Sox have been, more or less, pretty good lately.

I could not agree more.

I've been reading these threads for the past few days, and am taken aback by how completely sour so many of the fans are over this organization. They're not going to win all the time, and not every year is going to bring a pennant contender. If the majority of the fan base doesn't accept this, and continues to stay away - and Ricketts & Co. get their renovations done - the biggest problem White Sox fans will have won't be a bad hitting week, it'll be traffic on I-65 headed into Indianapolis to watch the White Sox play.

I've had HUGE complaints - and still do - in regards to how management markets this team, and now you see why. The White Sox fan base isn't interested in coming out to a baseball game - they're increasingly only interested in coming out a to White Sox win. One has to be honest, however, and credit them for putting a very good effort forth and fiedling a successful team. They never went 142-20, but have, for the most part, been very competitive over the past ten years.

Who knows, maybe all of this grumbling is the "chickens coming home to roost" from 30 years of screwed up marketing.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:52 PM
I think getting to the playoffs every once in a while, consider now that there's a wild card and there has been for a while, is not asking too much.. That attendance has been steadily declining since 05 should speak to you, but apparently you read into things what you wanna read into them.. and that's your right..

Well, between 2000 and 2010, they reached the playoffs three times, winning the World Series once. That's not a bad stretch if reaching the postseason "every one in a while" is your expectation. That seems to be exactly what they've been doing. Now, it's been five seasons since they were last in the playoffs, but in at least two of the seasons in which they missed the postseason ('10 and '12), they were in contention until the final weeks of the season. Could they have performed better in those seasons? Perhaps, but I don't believe things are as bad some would like to believe. Their roster needs work, but there are some nice pieces already in place.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 04:55 PM
I could not agree more.

I've been reading these threads for the past few days, and am taken aback by how completely sour so many of the fans are over this organization. They're not going to win all the time, and not every year is going to bring a pennant contender. If the majority of the fan base doesn't accept this, and continues to stay away - and Ricketts & Co. get their renovations done - the biggest problem White Sox fans will have won't be a bad hitting week, it'll be traffic on I-65 headed into Indianapolis to watch the White Sox play.

I've had HUGE complaints - and still do - in regards to how management markets this team, and now you see why. The White Sox fan base isn't interested in coming out to a baseball game - they're increasingly only interested in coming out a to White Sox win. One has to be honest, however, and credit them for putting a very good effort forth and fiedling a successful team. They never went 142-20, but have, for the most part, been very competitive over the past ten years.

Who knows, maybe all of this grumbling is the "chickens coming home to roost" from 30 years of screwed up marketing.

I'm being extremely nitpicky, but you don't actually believe that Indianapolis would support a Major League Baseball team, do you? I lived in Indianapolis for eight years ('01-09), during which time I discovered that the majority of the area's population devotes their time to basketball and football. Baseball is popular, but most area residents already have an interest in a nearby team (Reds, Cubs, White Sox). Southern Indiana has a fairly strong Cardinals rooting interest, and there are also residual pockets of Yankees fans left over from when Don Mattingly played there.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 04:56 PM
The other thing I bolded is something I have found intriguing. Indeed, the Sox had a good minor league system when he was in charge of minor league development, but that pretty much fell apart after he moved up to GM. What happened? Was it that he just did a poor job of hiring good people under him to succeed him in minor league development? I firmly believe the decline in the Sox minor league system over the last 10-12 years has lead us to the mess we're in now.

Well I think the biggest thing was that KW was never afraid to use his minor league system as trade bait, whereas Ron Schueler, his predecessor, was much more gun shy. There's still people who felt Scheuler didn't do enough to bolster the 2000 Sox team at the July trade deadline, even though the team had the #1 farm system in baseball and were on a tear to the playoffs, his only acquisition was a 3-month rental of Charles Johnson (which, of course, turned out very, very well for the Sox).

But of course, the top prospects in the Sox system in 2000 where guys like Mark Buehrle, Joe Crede, Aaron Rowand, Jon Garland, and Jon Rauch... These were guys that would go on to either star on the 2005 team or be used as trade bait for other important pieces of that team. Sometimes it's just luck.

The Sox biggest problem with their MiLB operations are that they have been the cheapest team in terms of draft and international spending. I think over the course of KW's GM tenure the Sox spent, by far, the least amount of money on draft bonuses. If you're not willing to pay for top talent, you're not going to get it. Plus the whole Dave Wilder scandal really hurt the team's progress in Latin America. There's a reason the only in-house Latino players the Sox have "developed" are from Cuba, whereas seemingly every team has a pile of prospects from the Dominican, Venezuela, etc. So I guess it's a perfect storm of bad management and shortsighted financial decisions by the front office.

That said, at least the team doesn't have many long term, burdensome contracts. Pretty much all the money is off the books by the end of 2014 with the exception of Danks, who, if he can be an average starter, at $15 M a year isn't TERRIBLE. There's quite a few teams out there that have some pretty alarmingly bad deals that will weigh their payroll for years. We're lucky in that regard.

KingXerxes
06-03-2013, 04:57 PM
I'm being extremely nitpicky, but you don't actually believe that Indianapolis would support a Major League Baseball team, do you? I lived in Indianapolis for eight years ('01-09), during which time I discovered that the majority of the area's population devotes their time to basketball and football. Baseball is popular, but most area residents already have an interest in a nearby team (Reds, Cubs, White Sox). Southern Indiana has a fairly strong Cardinals rooting interest, and there are also residual pockets of Yankees fans left over from when Don Mattingly played there.

No - I'm just trying to make a point.

That being said, however, I"m not sure Indy would make a bad MLB city. They need filler between the basketball and football seasons.

Las Vegas? San Antonio? Charlotte? Nashville? There are a lot of would-be suitors.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:04 PM
Well I think the biggest thing was that KW was never afraid to use his minor league system as trade bait, whereas Ron Schueler, his predecessor, was much more gun shy. There's still people who felt Scheuler didn't do enough to bolster the 2000 Sox team at the July trade deadline, even though the team had the #1 farm system in baseball and were on a tear to the playoffs, his only acquisition was a 3-month rental of Charles Johnson (which, of course, turned out very, very well for the Sox).

But of course, the top prospects in the Sox system in 2000 where guys like Mark Buehrle, Joe Crede, Aaron Rowand, Jon Garland, and Jon Rauch... These were guys that would go on to either star on the 2005 team or be used as trade bait for other important pieces of that team. Sometimes it's just luck.

The Sox biggest problem with their MiLB operations are that they have been the cheapest team in terms of draft and international spending. I think over the course of KW's GM tenure the Sox spent, by far, the least amount of money on draft bonuses. If you're not willing to pay for top talent, you're not going to get it. Plus the whole Dave Wilder scandal really hurt the team's progress in Latin America. There's a reason the only in-house Latino players the Sox have "developed" are from Cuba, whereas seemingly every team has a pile of prospects from the Dominican, Venezuela, etc. So I guess it's a perfect storm of bad management and shortsighted financial decisions by the front office.

That said, at least the team doesn't have many long term, burdensome contracts. Pretty much all the money is off the books by the end of 2014 with the exception of Danks, who, if he can be an average starter, at $15 M a year isn't TERRIBLE. There's quite a few teams out there that have some pretty alarmingly bad deals that will weigh their payroll for years. We're lucky in that regard.

This is an important point that I think people keep glossing over. As bad as the roster looks right now, there's a fair chance that the Sox will have much more flexibility to begin upgrading it as soon as 2015, once most of the current deals have expired. I don't believe that the Sox will suddenly start chasing after and signing marquee free-agents (they shouldn't), but they may be able to use some of their expiring contracts as a means of stockpiling young talent throughout their farm system, while letting the younger players on their current roster continue gaining experience.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think it could be extremely fun and interesting to watch the Sox use ST as an open tryout for each roster spot as the focus shifts away from this veteran team to a team of younger players, similar to what happened in '98 and '99. Those seasons weren't successful from a won-loss standpoint, but they did provide the Sox with players (Ordonez, Lee, Singleton, Konerko) who grew into prominent roles on later teams. Konerko, of course, is still an important member of the White Sox organization, and others all had successful MLB careers that involved stints with other teams.

The point is that the Sox can rebuild their team if they're willing to make the effort to do so. That means making a conscious decision to go with young players rather than continuing to find aging talent that may or may not be able to contribute. There's no guarantee that younger players will be able to play effectively at the Major League level, but if given the choice, I'd rather watch a young team struggle than a veteran team that's clearly on the decline.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:07 PM
No - I'm just trying to make a point.

That being said, however, I"m not sure Indy would make a bad MLB city. They need filler between the basketball and football seasons.

Las Vegas? San Antonio? Charlotte? Nashville? There are a lot of would-be suitors.

Part of the problem is that I don't see where they would have the stadium. Victory Field is located a few blocks from IUPUI and the Indiana University Schools of Medicine and Dentistry. It is where the Indians, an affiliate of the Pittsburgh Pirates, now play. That would seem to be the best place for a facility, but I don't know if it's better to simply upgrade Victory Field- an extremely nice ballpark, BTW- or tear it down and use the space to build a park that's more in line with other MLB venues.

Frater Perdurabo
06-03-2013, 05:13 PM
IIRC, Schueler earned his "gun shy" reputation for failing to trade prospects for significant midseason help in 91, 92 and 96.

KW was successful in that the Sox won a World Series. However, two division titles in 12 seasons just won't cut it (2000 was Schueler); IMHO the Sox should win the division, on average, once every three years.

I think KW has value to the organization and should not be cast aside so readily. I also think Hahn should not be judged until after the PK, Floyd and Thorton contracts expire, and he can invest those payroll dollars elsewhere.

Also, the Sox have built a quality pitching drafting, development and coaching system, and the architects of that should not be discarded. Rather, they need to emulate that system better to produce position players.

It looks like they are in process of rebuilding their Latin America operation under Marco Paddy.

Firing people to make fans feel better is not good business. Let's not fix what isn't broken; let's diagnose and solve the real problems.

doublem23
06-03-2013, 05:13 PM
Las Vegas? San Antonio? Charlotte? Nashville? There are a lot of would-be suitors.

It's a pretty big stretch to think any of those markets can sustain an MLB franchise. Just looking at attendance, average in the Majors is currently 29,483 per game, which is just under 2.4 million fans per season. That's a pretty taxing number on all of those cities, which would need basically everyone in their very, very spread out metro areas to come see a game.

And that's not even counting the immense hit your franchise would take moving from the 3rd largest media center in the country to one of these small towns. The more realistic question is, where in the metro area are the Sox going to move to? Stay in Bridgeport? South Loop? Hillside? Orland? Rosemont? Etc.

bestkosher
06-03-2013, 05:19 PM
One location I could see the Sox moving to locally would be bedford park. The strip along 65th is full of abadoned old factories and it is not far from Toyota park in Bridegeview and easy access to the 1-55 and 294.

Mr. Jinx
06-03-2013, 05:27 PM
One location I could see the Sox moving to locally would be bedford park. The strip along 65th is full of abadoned old factories and it is not far from Toyota park in Bridegeview and easy access to the 1-55 and 294.

Great, so we can move the team from one boring neighborhood full of beat up old properties to another boring neighborhood full of beat up old properties that's even further away from the city and public transportation. If the Sox were really going to get moved out of the city I'd just assume see them go a little nicer suburb.

KingXerxes
06-03-2013, 05:27 PM
It's a pretty big stretch to think any of those markets can sustain an MLB franchise. Just looking at attendance, average in the Majors is currently 29,483 per game, which is just under 2.4 million fans per season. That's a pretty taxing number on all of those cities, which would need basically everyone in their very, very spread out metro areas to come see a game.

And that's not even counting the immense hit your franchise would take moving from the 3rd largest media center in the country to one of these small towns. The more realistic question is, where in the metro area are the Sox going to move to? Stay in Bridgeport? South Loop? Hillside? Orland? Rosemont? Etc.

It depends I guess (I know this is getting off topic), but looking at St. Louis (Appx. 350,000), Minneapolis (about the same) or Cincinnati (even less) - show a team can be supported if there is a large enough suburban population around it. San Antonio and Las Vegas etc. are much bigger metro areas than the other three.

Again - I don't want to make it sound like the White Sox will be moving - but if everybody keeps "boycotting" this team, Reinsdorf may find his payoff in selling to an owner to relocate. I doubt it will happen, and I hope it won't happen - but it has happened in the past.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:27 PM
IIRC, Schueler earned his "gun shy" reputation for failing to trade prospects for significant midseason help in 91, 92 and 96.

I agree, though the '92 team was in a bad position to begin with because of injuries to Ozzie Guillen (knee), Bo Jackson (hip), and key role-players like Greg Grebeck (broken foot). The only acquisition I remember Schueler making that year was, ironically, Dale Sveum from Pittsburgh. I have the game where he made his Sox debut on VHS somewhere.

KW was successful in that the Sox won a World Series. However, two division titles in 12 seasons just won't cut it; IMHO the Sox should win the division, on average, once every three years.

Can failures in others seasons be blamed on KW, though? It's the GM's job to assemble talent, but it's the job of the field manager to get the most out of that talent by putting his players in the best position possible to be successful. The seasons of 2001 and '04 were ruined by injuries, although the '04 team was good enough on paper to win the division. I thought Williams did enough in '03 (the Alomar and Everett trades; Bartolo Colon) to help the Sox win the division, but Jerry Manuel's incompetence left the Sox at an extremely disadvantage when competing with teams like the Twins and Royals that season.

Now, if you're going to argue that Williams (and Reinsdorf) were to blame for not firing Manuel once it was obvious he was the reason for the team's struggles, I agree that they did the Sox harm by not pulling the trigger on JM's firing sooner than they did. However, I don't know that the '03 team would have been good enough to advance beyond the WC round. The bullpen was a mess, and there were still a number of holes (Konerko, Olivo) in the lineup once one got past the middle of the order. Add to that the fact that Magglio Ordonez was absolutely awful the final month of the season, and it's difficult to believe that team would have won anything beyond a division title.

I thought Kenny Williams put together a good team (not a great team) in 2006, as well, although I think he made a mistake in getting away from the small-ball approach that worked so well in '05. The Thome signing was the right move, as Everett was declining, and Frank Thomas was a huge question mark after breaking the navicular bone for the second time: no one expected him to finish fourth in the MVP voting that season.

I think KW has value to the organization and should not be cast aside so readily. I also think Hahn should not be judged until after the PK, Floyd and Thorton contracts expire, and he can invest those payroll dollars elsewhere.

I agree completely here.

Firing people to make fans feel better is not good business. Let's not fix what isn't broken; let's diagnose and solve the real problems.

Agree here, as well. I'd also add that accountability doesn't necessarily mean punishment. Accountability can be something as basic as simply making someone aware of a problem so that he has a chance to correct it. Axing an executive because it's convenient doesn't reflect well on anyone involved, no matter the person's track-record. Obviously, consistently poor performance shouldn't be tolerated, but the idea that someone should be fired at the first sign of trouble is something that needs to be ignored.

captain54
06-03-2013, 05:28 PM
Well, between 2000 and 2010, they reached the playoffs three times, winning the World Series once. That's not a bad stretch if reaching the postseason "every one in a while" is your expectation. That seems to be exactly what they've been doing. Now, it's been five seasons since they were last in the playoffs,

08 playoffs.. once in 8yrs.. that appearance, gone in the first round...

apparently you're not familiar with how things are in a big baseball market with a rabid fan base... how do you think the Yankee fans would react if their team played one round of playoffs in 8 yrs???

Irishsox1
06-03-2013, 05:31 PM
I read the Sun-Times article and I can't tell if they are describing the team or Robin Ventura? Robin is a nice, quite but subdued guy and the kinda reflects his personality. But Robin knows what is wrong, it's just not in his character to fire up the team. If Robin want's to fire up the team, take a page from the Lou Panella playbook, on the next close call that doesn't go the Sox way go crazy on the ump, maybe pick up a base and throw it in the outfield.

There is no way Robin would ever do that but what the heck does he have to lose?

DSpivack
06-03-2013, 05:31 PM
It's a pretty big stretch to think any of those markets can sustain an MLB franchise. Just looking at attendance, average in the Majors is currently 29,483 per game, which is just under 2.4 million fans per season. That's a pretty taxing number on all of those cities, which would need basically everyone in their very, very spread out metro areas to come see a game.

And that's not even counting the immense hit your franchise would take moving from the 3rd largest media center in the country to one of these small towns. The more realistic question is, where in the metro area are the Sox going to move to? Stay in Bridgeport? South Loop? Hillside? Orland? Rosemont? Etc.

I see no reason why the Sox would move from USCF in 15 years. The park isn't that old and there's nothing wrong with it, the deal with it is a sweetheart one, and the location is good.

As for other metro areas, I agree, their media markets are way too small. Beyond that, Las Vegas may have the glitz of The Strip, but it was hit harder by the economic crisis perhaps moreso than any other city. San Antonio is also not a real wealthy area. Charlotte and Nashville have more corporate support than either of the first two, but still are dwarfed by Chicago.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:34 PM
08 playoffs.. once in 8yrs.. that appearance, gone in the first round...

apparently you're not familiar with how things are in a big baseball market with a rabid fan base... how do you think the Yankee fans would react if their team played one round of playoffs in 8 yrs???

I'm sure they wouldn't react well, but what does that have to do with the White Sox? Just because the Yankees have long functioned by a hellfire and brimstone approach doesn't mean that the Sox should follow suit. Contrary to popular belief, the panic button and the easy button are not the same thing, even if they are both painted red.

As Frater pointed out, it's never a good idea to fire someone just because that's what the masses want. The popular move isn't always the right move, nor is catering to those who scream and cry the loudest. I trust the people the Sox have in place to rebuild this team, and I trust them to do it by making decisions that right for the club in both the short- and long-term.

DSpivack
06-03-2013, 05:35 PM
It depends I guess (I know this is getting off topic), but looking at St. Louis (Appx. 350,000), Minneapolis (about the same) or Cincinnati (even less) - show a team can be supported if there is a large enough suburban population around it. San Antonio and Las Vegas etc. are much bigger metro areas than the other three.

Again - I don't want to make it sound like the White Sox will be moving - but if everybody keeps "boycotting" this team, Reinsdorf may find his payoff in selling to an owner to relocate. I doubt it will happen, and I hope it won't happen - but it has happened in the past.

No, they're not. San Antonio and Vegas are both quite a bit smaller than St. Louis and Minneapolis. They're about equal in population to Cincinnati, but the Reds are also baseball's oldest franchise, IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States

jdm2662
06-03-2013, 05:36 PM
It's a pretty big stretch to think any of those markets can sustain an MLB franchise. Just looking at attendance, average in the Majors is currently 29,483 per game, which is just under 2.4 million fans per season. That's a pretty taxing number on all of those cities, which would need basically everyone in their very, very spread out metro areas to come see a game.

And that's not even counting the immense hit your franchise would take moving from the 3rd largest media center in the country to one of these small towns. The more realistic question is, where in the metro area are the Sox going to move to? Stay in Bridgeport? South Loop? Hillside? Orland? Rosemont? Etc.

Very few people even know where Hillside is. I only know because, well, I lived there for 22 years...

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:38 PM
Very few people even know where Hillside is. I only know because, well, I lived there for 22 years...

Is it next to a hill? :cool:

KingXerxes
06-03-2013, 05:40 PM
No, they're not. San Antonio and Vegas are both quite a bit smaller than St. Louis and Minneapolis. They're about equal in population to Cincinnati, but the Reds are also baseball's oldest franchise, IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States

I apologize - The cities proper of San Antonio and Las Vegas are much more populated than the cities of St. Louis, Minneapolis and Cincinnati - with the latter three being supported by greater suburban development. I mis-spoke saying "metro-areas" (I meant city population).

Either way - even looking at the wikipedia list - there are plenty of metro areas which could potentially support a team. Again - this is not to say the White Sox are or will move - I don't think they will.

Hitmen77
06-03-2013, 05:40 PM
Well I think the biggest thing was that KW was never afraid to use his minor league system as trade bait, whereas Ron Schueler, his predecessor, was much more gun shy. There's still people who felt Scheuler didn't do enough to bolster the 2000 Sox team at the July trade deadline, even though the team had the #1 farm system in baseball and were on a tear to the playoffs, his only acquisition was a 3-month rental of Charles Johnson (which, of course, turned out very, very well for the Sox).

But of course, the top prospects in the Sox system in 2000 where guys like Mark Buehrle, Joe Crede, Aaron Rowand, Jon Garland, and Jon Rauch... These were guys that would go on to either star on the 2005 team or be used as trade bait for other important pieces of that team. Sometimes it's just luck.

The Sox biggest problem with their MiLB operations are that they have been the cheapest team in terms of draft and international spending. I think over the course of KW's GM tenure the Sox spent, by far, the least amount of money on draft bonuses. If you're not willing to pay for top talent, you're not going to get it. Plus the whole Dave Wilder scandal really hurt the team's progress in Latin America. There's a reason the only in-house Latino players the Sox have "developed" are from Cuba, whereas seemingly every team has a pile of prospects from the Dominican, Venezuela, etc. So I guess it's a perfect storm of bad management and shortsighted financial decisions by the front office.

That said, at least the team doesn't have many long term, burdensome contracts. Pretty much all the money is off the books by the end of 2014 with the exception of Danks, who, if he can be an average starter, at $15 M a year isn't TERRIBLE. There's quite a few teams out there that have some pretty alarmingly bad deals that will weigh their payroll for years. We're lucky in that regard.

Plus, the big league team in 2000 had a couple of 24 year olds in Konerko and Lee and a 26-yr old Magglio. There was a lot of young talent in the organization back then.

That may explain why KW's success as GM dried up around 2008 - that was around the time that the internal talent pool dried up too. What made Williams a great GM is that he was able to combine some home grown stars (like Buehrle, Konerko, etc.), trade prospects for more pieces to a winning team (Garcia), AND he had a great knack for finding undervalued, under the radar pickups (Dye, AJ).

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 05:42 PM
Plus, the big league team in 2000 had a couple of 24 year olds in Konerko and Lee and a 26-yr old Magglio. There was a lot of young talent in the organization back then.

That may explain why KW's success as GM dried up around 2008 - that was around the time that the internal talent pool dried up too. What made Williams a great GM is that he was able to combine some home grown stars (like Buehrle, Konerko, etc.), trade prospects for more pieces to a winning team (Garcia), AND he had a great knack for finding undervalued, under the radar pickups (Dye, AJ).

Don't forget Iguchi, who was a big part of the '05 team.

Tragg
06-03-2013, 05:55 PM
I agree. And I also think that going forward, the Sox have more options than people think. Between Konerko, Floyd and Thornton, $27.5 million comes off the books in 2013. Dunn and Rios come off the books in 2014 -- that's another $27 million. Now, the Sox could probably deal Rios at the deadline in 2013 and get a very good prospect or two for him. The Mets are rumored to have interest in rios and they have some intriguing prospects in their system.

So what do we do? Load up with another crop of free agents and hope to win 85? Supplementing with free agents when you have strong core works well. We lack that core.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 06:00 PM
So what do we do? Load up with another crop of free agents and hope to win 85? Supplementing with free agents when you have strong core works well. We lack that core.

That approach has been tried and hasn't worked. I think the Sox should use whatever money and resources they have to build their farm system. The players whom they believe stand the best chance of reaching the big leagues and contributing should be their priority. The rest can be moved to acquire solid veteran players who can mentor the younger players as each matriculates to the Major Leagues.

One aspect of the Sox farm system that must change is the emphasis on drafting and pushing players simply because they can hit for power. The "home run or nothing" approach hasn't been successful," so it's time for the Sox to find players who do other things well (fielding, base-running, etc.). They also need to focus on finding prospects at key positions (catcher, SS, OF spots). The 1B/DH types can be found by other means. In Viciedo, they already have one such player on the roster, so they don't need to waste time drafting a similar player (Barnum is in the farm system right now, but he can't stay off the disabled list long enough to do anything productive).

Lip Man 1
06-03-2013, 06:05 PM
So what do we do? Load up with another crop of free agents and hope to win 85? Supplementing with free agents when you have strong core works well. We lack that core.

I'll be very interested to see what free agents find the Sox attractive this off season especially in the event Hahn pulls the trigger and starts rebuilding unless of course the Sox possibly overpay.

Anything is possible but depending on how things go the next few months, I don't know how attractive the Sox are going to be for a few years.

Lip

slavko
06-03-2013, 06:06 PM
I really have no idea what KW's duties are in his new job. Whatever they are, I hope he has success in turning this team around.


I've always maintained that Kenny was a better GM when he had no money to work with. Once he won a WS and got the keys to the vault, he spent fortunes on the wrong players. He had the formula and went away from it.

What are his duties? Staying out of the way, I would guess.

cards press box
06-03-2013, 06:15 PM
So what do we do? Load up with another crop of free agents and hope to win 85? Supplementing with free agents when you have strong core works well. We lack that core.

I disagree about not having a core -- the Sox' core is their pitching. Let's assume (and I admit this is a fairly big assumption) that John Danks pitches effectively by mid-season. Then the Sox will have a big 4 of Danks, Chris Sale, Jake Peavy and Jose Quintana. That is pretty good right there. And then you have other potential starters like Hector Santiago and Erik Johnson waiting in the wings. Addison Reed is a strong closer and the Sox have always had success putting together a bullpen.

As for the offensive players, the core is Alexei Ramirez, Gordon Beckham, Dayan Viciedo, Conor Gillaspie and Alex Rios, if they don't deal him for prospects. Let's say that the Sox deal Rios for prospects and have $40 million off the books for 2014. And let's say that they do deal Dunn but have to pay 2/3 of his salary to do so. That's a savings of $5 million and a total of $45 million of the books.

Here is what the Sox could do with that salary relief: sign Curtis Granderson to play RF, Kendrys Morales to play 1B, Nate McLouth to play CF and Brian McCann to play C/DH. The Sox would then have a bench of Josh Phegley, Tyler Flowers, Alejandro DeAza and Jeff Keppinger and would have the following starting lineup:

McLouth CF
Beckham 2B
K. Morales 1B
McCann DH
Viciedo LF
Granderson RF
A. Ramirez SS
Gillaspie 3B
Phegley C

With the Sox' pitching, that would be an interesting team with a fairly dynamic offense, good defense and some depth. What do you all think?

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 06:27 PM
I've always maintained that Kenny was a better GM when he had no money to work with. Once he won a WS and got the keys to the vault, he spent fortunes on the wrong players. He had the formula and went away from it.

What are his duties? Staying out of the way, I would guess.

I'd argue that this is true of most MLB general managers. Throwing money at players is not a skill: evaluating talent and deciding if and how it fits with your roster, on the other hand, is an extremely important skill for a GM to have. As much money as the Yankees have spent since 2001, they've won exactly the same number of World Championships as the White Sox. Joe Torre's book The Yankee Years talks about the shift in organizational philosophy after the Yankees were beaten by the D-Backs in the '01 WS, and how Steinbrenner's desire to outspend everyone helped acquire more talent, but it also weakened the chemistry in the clubhouse, which, in Torre's opinion, made for worse teams.

Torre believes that the teams of '96-00- which were a combination of home-grown talent (Jeter, Bernie Williams, Rivera, Pettite, Posada, etc.) and key free-agent or trade acquisitions (Scott Brosius, Chad Curtis, Dwight Gooden, Darryl Strawberry, Tino Martinez, Jeff Nelson, Cecil Fielder, Joe Girardi) that came at bargain prices, not by breaking the bank- were far superior to later incarnations of the Yankees roster. Why? They had pieces that fit together well, even if some weren't the most expensive parts available.

Williams' best work was in assembling the 2005 team, which actually wasn't all that different from the Yankees team I mentioned. He didn't put that team together by spending money. He did by committing to a philosophy for running and building a team and sticking to it, regardless of whatever criticism was hurled in his direction. Not everyone was happy about letting Magglio walk: number of posters on this message board were banned for throwing hissy-fits after he was allowed to sign with Detroit. Others griped about the trade of Carlos Lee for Scott Podsednik, but both moves paved the way for other roster additions (Jermaine Dye, for instance) that helped to make the Sox a complete team.

mahagga73
06-03-2013, 06:32 PM
We will never agree because your definition of success and mine are worlds apart. You think a winning record is successful. I think one playoff appearance in 7 yrs from a big market franchise is not successful. You wanna focus on the positive and I find it alarming that we were embarrassed by the Flubs, are entering a dark phase in Sox history, with pretty much the glow of 05 vanished. Whatever
Looks like the board is piling on you, so I have to say I am more leaning towards your view of things. A lot of people on here are still basking in the glow of 05 , nevermind the 5 straight failures to make the playoffs. Expectations , at least in my opinion, are laughably low around the White Sox. you put up a .500 or a little better record every year and all of a sudden you deserve a lifetime contract. That seems to be the standard of high achievement for many. Yes you cannot take away the fact KW helped build a team that won the series , but little has been done on his watch to get them over the hump of mediocrity since. Lot's of signings of aging free agents ... Still no progress on developing position players who can replace the overpaid underachievers on the roster. I for one am not impressed with his work the last 5 years, KW as GM that is, and hope Hahn is being given the freedom to shape the team as he pleases.

Lip Man 1
06-03-2013, 07:23 PM
I disagree about not having a core -- the Sox' core is their pitching. Let's assume (and I admit this is a fairly big assumption) that John Danks pitches effectively by mid-season. Then the Sox will have a big 4 of Danks, Chris Sale, Jake Peavy and Jose Quintana. That is pretty good right there. And then you have other potential starters like Hector Santiago and Erik Johnson waiting in the wings. Addison Reed is a strong closer and the Sox have always had success putting together a bullpen.

As for the offensive players, the core is Alexei Ramirez, Gordon Beckham, Dayan Viciedo, Conor Gillaspie and Alex Rios, if they don't deal him for prospects. Let's say that the Sox deal Rios for prospects and have $40 million off the books for 2014. And let's say that they do deal Dunn but have to pay 2/3 of his salary to do so. That's a savings of $5 million and a total of $45 million of the books.

Here is what the Sox could do with that salary relief: sign Curtis Granderson to play RF, Kendrys Morales to play 1B, Nate McLouth to play CF and Brian McCann to play C/DH. The Sox would then have a bench of Josh Phegley, Tyler Flowers, Alejandro DeAza and Jeff Keppinger and would have the following starting lineup:

McLouth CF
Beckham 2B
K. Morales 1B
McCann DH
Viciedo LF
Granderson RF
A. Ramirez SS
Gillaspie 3B
Phegley C

With the Sox' pitching, that would be an interesting team with a fairly dynamic offense, good defense and some depth. What do you all think?

Cards:

Just my opinion but I don't think McLouth is that good.

Regarding Granderson (whom I doubt the Yankees will let walk), McCann (whom I doubt the Braves will let walk) and Morales I'd love to have all of them, bring em' on.

But the question remains why would those guys be interested in the Sox? Outside of giving them the largest deal why would they want to play here, what could the Sox or the city offer them that say Baltimore or Cleveland or Philadelphia can't?

Especially if they know about the troubles this franchise is having both on the field and in the stands?

Again I'd love to see them all here but I just don't know if the Sox are going to be attractive for awhile. They have to want to sign here as much as the Sox might want to have them.

Notice I said might, it all depends on what JR decides to do this off season for next year. He might decide to go "all in" again or he might tell Hahn, "do the rebuild, slash payroll to 50 million and invest in the farm system..."

You just don't know.

Lip

cards press box
06-03-2013, 07:38 PM
Lip,

McLouth is one possibility. There are a lot of other free agent outfielders in 2014, as this link (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/league-info/potential-free-agents-for-2014/) shows. The free agent class is deepest at catcher, outfielder and first base. This is a happy accident for the Sox, as their greatest needs lie in those positions.

I don't see McCann going back to Atlanta. With the emergnce of Evan Gattis, the Braves' catchers next year will be Gattis and Gerald Laird. McCann would be a great fit as a catcher/DH for an AL team. He would fit in with the White Sox nicely.

As for Granderson, I don't know. Granderson is from here and went to Thornton high school. The Yanks will certainly re-sign Cano. Do they also bring back Granderson or let Gardner stay in center and sign Choo who would be a perfect fit in Yankee Stadium? And if the Yanks sign Granderson, wouldn't Choo be a good fit to play RF for the Sox, assuming that they deal Rios for prospects as I suspect they will in July?

The Sox can offer one thing that Baltimore or Cleveland or Philadelphia cannot: one of the three biggest media markets in the nation. And it is not as though the Sox can't pitch -- it is clear that they certainly can, particularly in the starting rotation. Add Morales, McCann and Granderson or Choo and a second outfielder such as McLouth or David Murphy to what the Sox already have (minus Konerko, Thornton, Floyd and even Rios), and the Sox would be a much improved team on offense.

captain54
06-03-2013, 07:53 PM
Looks like the board is piling on .

That's fine. Most of them are too young or haven't been around long enough and they interpret passion as negativity.

Its what fans have been doing as long as sports have been around. kvetch and moan about their team. Demand answers for why things are going south.

The goal of sports is to end up at the top the top of the heap. In the 60s the Sox had some amazing teams, but always finished behind the Yankees..every year management would try to figure out how to beat the Yankees, not sit back and be content with 90 plus win seasons.

It's great to cheer all year for a team that is winning, but if you aren't watching them in October, it's sort of hollow

I understand that people have preferences as to the tone and demeanor they would prefer on their board, that it be colored with a positive spin. If that's the case, it should be stated upfront instead of couching it with slanted arguments and semi-demeaning veiled insults

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 08:10 PM
That's fine. Most of them are too young or haven't been around long enough and they interpret passion as negativity.

Its what fans have been doing as long as sports have been around. kvetch and moan about their team. Demand answers for why things are going south.

The goal of sports is to end up at the top the top of the heap. In the 60s the Sox had some amazing teams, but always finished behind the Yankees..every year management would try to figure out how to beat the Yankees, not sit back and be content with 90 plus win seasons.

It's great to cheer all year for a team that is winning, but if you aren't watching them in October, it's sort of hollow

I understand that people have preferences as to the tone and demeanor they would prefer on their board, that it be colored with a positive spin. If that's the case, it should be stated upfront instead of couching it with slanted arguments and semi-demeaning veiled insults

It seems to me you've said as much (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=51094&highlight=captain54) before, in 2005, no less.

WhiteSox5187
06-03-2013, 08:10 PM
This is extremely short sighted thinking. I am trying to think of any successful pro sports franchise that just fires people every time there is a sign of trouble. Yes, the first few months of 2013 have been bad and right now the future seems bleak. But KW's been far more positive for the Sox than negative. While he was Director of Minor League Development, the Sox built the league's top-rated farm system. I would venture to guess that during his tenure as GM (2000-2012), the Sox were one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball. I don't know what his official duties are any more. I agree it was time for him to step away from the day-to-day management of the White Sox roster. But to think he has no insight to offer the Sox is patently ridiculous; if he were fired by JR today he could undoubtedly find another job in upper management of another MLB front office in weeks.

I understand the frustration with how the roster looks right now, but come on, guys, think with your brains.

Kenny may have done more harm than good but I don't think that the White Sox were anywhere close to being one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball during his tenure. He had a great year in 2005 but up until then teams like the Twins, the Yankees, the Red Sox, the A's, the Braves, the Cardinals, the Giants and the Dodgers were always consistently better than the White Sox. After 2005 you had those teams plus teams like the Rays, the Phillies, the Reds, the Brewers and the Tigers being better than the White Sox.

The fact that this organization is hand strung with bad contracts for declining veterans and has no talent in the minor leagues (and hasn't produced any since 2001) is his responsiblity as well. I know that some people like to say "Well as GM he was too focused on the major league roster," well the GM is also responsible for the draft and the minor leagues as well. You can do both, in the latter half of his tenure Kenny wasn't able to do either.

captain54
06-03-2013, 08:14 PM
It seems to me you've said as much (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=51094&highlight=captain54) before, in 2005, no less.

The Sox almost blew the lead in 05. There was reason to panic. Were you watching the games?

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 08:16 PM
The Sox almost blew the lead in 05. There was reason to panic. Were you watching the games?

Yes, I watched the games.

Yes, I know that they almost blew their division lead.

However, the thread that ended up in the ****house was started well before their second-half slide that nearly allowed the Indians to overtake them. Your argument has no merit. You whined about the Sox eight years ago, and you're still doing it. I'm only sorry 'West isn't here to see it.

WhiteSox5187
06-03-2013, 08:20 PM
Looks like the board is piling on you, so I have to say I am more leaning towards your view of things. A lot of people on here are still basking in the glow of 05 , nevermind the 5 straight failures to make the playoffs. Expectations , at least in my opinion, are laughably low around the White Sox. you put up a .500 or a little better record every year and all of a sudden you deserve a lifetime contract. That seems to be the standard of high achievement for many. Yes you cannot take away the fact KW helped build a team that won the series , but little has been done on his watch to get them over the hump of mediocrity since. Lot's of signings of aging free agents ... Still no progress on developing position players who can replace the overpaid underachievers on the roster. I for one am not impressed with his work the last 5 years, KW as GM that is, and hope Hahn is being given the freedom to shape the team as he pleases.

I think that Kenny deserves a lot of credit for 2005 however the playoffs are a crapshoot, a good GM puts together a team that is consistently able to reach the playoffs and from there it is on the manager and the players (for the most part). Kenny was here for 12 seasons and was only able to make the playoffs twice, as far as I am concerned that's not good enough. Granted, there were some injuries in those years (2004 specifically) but even with that, his teams were always fundamentally flawed in some way shape or form. At first it was the inability to find a fifth starter, then it became the offense that could only score with a home run, that all goes back to the GM.

captain54
06-03-2013, 08:30 PM
Yes, I watched the games.

Yes, I know that they almost blew their division lead.

However, the thread that ended up in the ****house was started well before their second-half slide that nearly allowed the Indians to overtake them. Your argument has no merit. You whined about the Sox eight years ago, and you're still doing it. I'm only sorry 'West isn't here to see it.

If I was unhappy with the Sox play at the time Im sure there was a reason. It only pleases you when someone has the same point of view as yourself it seems.

I'm a long long long time fan that lives and dies with the Sox. If my complaining bothers you or others, Im sorry. Don't take it personally. I'm trying to be civil and intelligent and avoid the childishness. If you guys don't want me posting on your board just tell me, I won't post. Simple. I'll follow the board because I like the board and everything Sox either way.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 09:02 PM
If I was unhappy with the Sox play at the time Im sure there was a reason. It only pleases you when someone has the same point of view as yourself it seems.

I'm a long long long time fan that lives and dies with the Sox. If my complaining bothers you or others, Im sorry. Don't take it personally. I'm trying to be civil and intelligent and avoid the childishness. If you guys don't want me posting on your board just tell me, I won't post. Simple. I'll follow the board because I like the board and everything Sox either way.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said I didn't want you here. You're welcome to your opinion, but you shouldn't be surprised if others disagree with you, be it myself or someone else. In any event, I don't make the decisions about who can post here and who can't. You'll have to take that up with someone else.

Frater Perdurabo
06-03-2013, 09:04 PM
Some may say my "one playoff appearance every three years" is too unfair, but I stick by it.

We are in the second-weakest division in baseball, with three "small market" teams.

If we are not making the playoffs three times per decade, something is wrong.

We know what is wrong. This organization does not produce quality position players, for several reasons. First, we have failed to sign players from Latin America. Second, we have failed to draft many good position players. Third, we have failed to coach drafted position players to do much more than try to hit for power. This is why the Sox have had to turn to trades and free agency to attempt to bring position players into the organization, where in many cases they simply fail (Swisher, Teahen, Dunn, etc.) and/or consume large chunks of payroll (PK, Rios, etc.).

bestkosher
06-03-2013, 09:46 PM
Great, so we can move the team from one boring neighborhood full of beat up old properties to another boring neighborhood full of beat up old properties that's even further away from the city and public transportation. If the Sox were really going to get moved out of the city I'd just assume see them go a little nicer suburb. Bedford Park is on the very edge of Chicago on the Southwest Side. It is hardly father away. The expressways are quite close actually to it. Also you have many local bars nearby, lodging and restaurants as well. Plus you are not that far off of archer avenue as well.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=map+of++bedford+park&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x880e373c6e46d7db:0xc0b5b07ae2028ca4,Bedfor d+Park,+IL&gl=us&ei=QketUer8IqnXygGNyIGgAw&ved=0CCoQ8gEwAA

amsteel
06-03-2013, 09:51 PM
I think we got **** til 2015. And it'll be a long 1.5 years.

captain54
06-03-2013, 09:52 PM
Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said I didn't want you here. You're welcome to your opinion, but you shouldn't be surprised if others disagree with you, be it myself or someone else. In any event, I don't make the decisions about who can post here and who can't. You'll have to take that up with someone else.

ok.. fair enough...

mahagga73
06-03-2013, 10:00 PM
If I was unhappy with the Sox play at the time Im sure there was a reason. It only pleases you when someone has the same point of view as yourself it seems.

I'm a long long long time fan that lives and dies with the Sox. If my complaining bothers you or others, Im sorry. Don't take it personally. I'm trying to be civil and intelligent and avoid the childishness. If you guys don't want me posting on your board just tell me, I won't post. Simple. I'll follow the board because I like the board and everything Sox either way.
Don't take it personal , this board isn't one of those hold hands and sing together kind . Lot's of different opinions, people aren't afraid to challenge those. I sure wouldn't let it bother you. Most the people on the board, I get the feeling, are also die-hards, live and die with the team, and are in a lot of cases very knowledgeable about a lot of stuff. That lends itself to a lot of passion.

RKMeibalane
06-03-2013, 10:02 PM
Don't take it personal , this board isn't one of those hold hands and sing together kind . Lot's of different opinions, people aren't afraid to challenge those. I sure wouldn't let it bother you.

With the exception of TheForce.net, I've never seen a board that is. :cool:

mahagga73
06-03-2013, 10:08 PM
Some may say my "one playoff appearance every three years" is too unfair, but I stick by it.

We are in the second-weakest division in baseball, with three "small market" teams.

If we are not making the playoffs three times per decade, something is wrong.

We know what is wrong. This organization does not produce quality position players, for several reasons. First, we have failed to sign players from Latin America. Second, we have failed to draft many good position players. Third, we have failed to coach drafted position players to do much more than try to hit for power. This is why the Sox have had to turn to trades and free agency to attempt to bring position players into the organization, where in many cases they simply fail (Swisher, Teahen, Dunn, etc.) and/or consume large chunks of payroll (PK, Rios, etc.).
Yeah that's what bothers me, this division has been there for the taking almost every year since 05. There hasn't been a powerhouse team to deal with like the Indian's of the 90's. Yeah the Tigers have went to the series twice but they have hardly been scintillating in the regular season.

mahagga73
06-03-2013, 10:24 PM
Kenny may have done more harm than good but I don't think that the White Sox were anywhere close to being one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball during his tenure. He had a great year in 2005 but up until then teams like the Twins, the Yankees, the Red Sox, the A's, the Braves, the Cardinals, the Giants and the Dodgers were always consistently better than the White Sox. After 2005 you had those teams plus teams like the Rays, the Phillies, the Reds, the Brewers and the Tigers being better than the White Sox.

The fact that this organization is hand strung with bad contracts for declining veterans and has no talent in the minor leagues (and hasn't produced any since 2001) is his responsiblity as well. I know that some people like to say "Well as GM he was too focused on the major league roster," well the GM is also responsible for the draft and the minor leagues as well. You can do both, in the latter half of his tenure Kenny wasn't able to do either.
Exactly. I think maybe a lot of people are giving added weight to the series win like it trumps 10 divisions in a row , which it does for many considering the 88 year drought. This gave KW many years of immunity from criticism. The Sox strategy of putting together something good enough not to be too awful is springing leaks. Paulie is not what he was, and the rest the lineup is filled with underachievers. Now it is becoming all too clear this kind of patchwork philosophy has a shelf date, it won't work forever, and organizational change is needed . I live in Central Illinois , big-time Cardinals , as well as Cubs and Sox territory, and I watch the Cardinals sometimes and am jealous as you know what how they pull these studs right out of their farm system every year and replace the old guard with them .They are like a baseball excellence machine. The last time I can even remember them being mediocre was the early 90's Torre years. I just imagine the Sox being like that someday hopefully. I'm glad we aren't the Royals but you got to make the playoffs to be a consistent threat.

StillMissOzzie
06-03-2013, 10:54 PM
That's fine, if you want to maintain such a ridiculously high standard of success, but mine are based on what is relative to the rest of the league. So please, do tell, how many teams out there would you say had a more sucessful run in KW's GM tenureship than the Sox? Obviously the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Cardinals, and Giants. That's 5 of 29 teams. Please, feel free to fill me in. Where are these other glorious streaks of championships across the Majors? Because I don't see them. Most teams exist like us, runs of good years and bad years and, hopefully, a year or two here when you get lucky, catch all the breaks, and win the whole thing. That's the reality for most baseball fans.

I find it alarming that the Sox are playing poorly, that it happened against the Cubs is nothing more than a coincidence. Those games don't mean anything more than a game against the Astros, Blue Jays, etc. You want to focus solely on the negative and apparently have no real concept of success or failure in baseball because I can guarantee you, at least 15, probably 20 other teams, would trade our last decade with theirs in a heartbeat. That that is a fact, and not opinion, is what you don't seem to comprehend. The Sox have been, more or less, pretty good lately.

Statements like this make me wonder if you know the difference between a fact and idle conjecture, let alone an opinion. What guarantee could you make? And why?

SMO
:gulp:

mahagga73
06-03-2013, 11:03 PM
Statements like this make me wonder if you know the difference between a fact and idle conjecture, let alone an opinion. What guarantee could you make? And why?

SMO
:gulp:
No Kiddin .Pretty good is not 5 straight playoff-less seasons and mediocre record after mediocre record. How anyone can say that is beyond me. They have not been pretty good lately , that's an extreme exaggeration. They are the poster boys for mediocrity. Whether the WS title cancels that out is a matter of opinion, but "pretty good" is a stretch. And the Cub's games most certainly mean a heck of a lot more to me and pretty much every other Sox fan I know than an Astros game.

Tragg
06-04-2013, 12:28 AM
McLouth CF
Beckham 2B
K. Morales 1B
McCann DH
Viciedo LF
Granderson RF
A. Ramirez SS
Gillaspie 3B
Phegley C

With the Sox' pitching, that would be an interesting team with a fairly dynamic offense, good defense and some depth. What do you all think?
Of that team, only McCann is right in his prime. And that's what the Sox need - quality players in their prime. They're hard to get - usually you get them before their prime, or, like the Sox, after their prime.
McClouth is the type of player that has plagued the Sox for years: low obp, no power, and well past his prime.
Morales is another low obp ball player - not good at 1B when you hit for power and should walk by default.
Granderon is 32, right when players start to hit the wall. His OBP is marginal, and if loses this power surge he's been enjoying, that will be that.

On Williams, he did a great job with the minors when he was running it. When he hired people to run it for him, it went into the ground. He did a good job stocking the Major League team for a long time, but his moves that last 4-5 years have been largely dreadful.

BainesHOF
06-04-2013, 12:57 AM
Hahn should not have Williams in the organization looking over his shoulder.

Tragg
06-04-2013, 01:24 AM
One thing that Williams did consistently well throughout his tenure was make small trades, and finding players off the wire. We need to continue to do that. Some savvy moves there can fill the roster, prevent us from signing any Wises, and occasionally you can find a gem.
More of his big trades were bad than good. I'd say his best trade was Freddie Garcia for Gio and Floyd.

Selling and rebuilding will be a long process. The Astros had a lot more to sell than we do. They got a lot of really good prospects, some of whom were low minor prospects, but with high potential. Their best deal was probably the Pence deal with the Phillies, where they refused the Dominic Brown AAA foolsgold, and went for 2 A/AA players with very high potential. But theirs will be a long road.

JB98
06-04-2013, 01:31 AM
One thing that Williams did consistently well throughout his tenure was make small trades, and finding players off the wire. We need to continue to do that. Some savvy moves there can fill the roster, prevent us from signing any Wises, and occasionally you can find a gem.
More of his big trades were bad than good. I'd say his best trade was Freddie Garcia for Gio and Floyd.

I thought his best trade was the one where he acquired Garcia. The move to get Contreras was awesome too. It maybe wasn't a "big trade," but the New York people thought they were getting an "All-Star" in Loaiza.

KW made two great trades in the middle of the 2004 season. Those moves were the two biggest in making the Sox a champion.

Tragg
06-04-2013, 01:38 AM
I thought his best trade was the one where he acquired Garcia. The move to get Contreras was awesome too. It maybe wasn't a "big trade," but the New York people thought they were getting an "All-Star" in Loaiza.

KW made two great trades in the middle of the 2004 season. Those moves were the two biggest in making the Sox a champion.
We certainly had Jose for the best year of his career. I'd add signing AJ and Jenks off the scrapheap as far as catching the lightening that team did.

Frater Perdurabo
06-04-2013, 07:45 AM
How about that nifty three-team trade to get Bartolo Colon for the 2003 season?

Getting Danks for McCarthy was a good trade, too.

24thStFan
06-04-2013, 08:46 AM
Some may say my "one playoff appearance every three years" is too unfair, but I stick by it.

We are in the second-weakest division in baseball, with three "small market" teams.

If we are not making the playoffs three times per decade, something is wrong.

Any long- term evaluation of the organization must consider the division in which the Sox play. It is fair to consider and another factor that demonstrates the organization's poor performance since '05. We should have dominated the AL Central but didn't.

asindc
06-04-2013, 09:37 AM
Cards:

Just my opinion but I don't think McLouth is that good.

Regarding Granderson (whom I doubt the Yankees will let walk), McCann (whom I doubt the Braves will let walk) and Morales I'd love to have all of them, bring em' on.

But the question remains why would those guys be interested in the Sox? Outside of giving them the largest deal why would they want to play here, what could the Sox or the city offer them that say Baltimore or Cleveland or Philadelphia can't?

Especially if they know about the troubles this franchise is having both on the field and in the stands?

Again I'd love to see them all here but I just don't know if the Sox are going to be attractive for awhile. They have to want to sign here as much as the Sox might want to have them.

Notice I said might, it all depends on what JR decides to do this off season for next year. He might decide to go "all in" again or he might tell Hahn, "do the rebuild, slash payroll to 50 million and invest in the farm system..."

You just don't know.

Lip

Not disagreeing with the general point of your post, but have you been to Baltimore or Cleveland?

asindc
06-04-2013, 09:43 AM
Exactly. I think maybe a lot of people are giving added weight to the series win like it trumps 10 divisions in a row , which it does for many considering the 88 year drought. This gave KW many years of immunity from criticism. The Sox strategy of putting together something good enough not to be too awful is springing leaks. Paulie is not what he was, and the rest the lineup is filled with underachievers. Now it is becoming all too clear this kind of patchwork philosophy has a shelf date, it won't work forever, and organizational change is needed . I live in Central Illinois , big-time Cardinals , as well as Cubs and Sox territory, and I watch the Cardinals sometimes and am jealous as you know what how they pull these studs right out of their farm system every year and replace the old guard with them .They are like a baseball excellence machine. The last time I can even remember them being mediocre was the early 90's Torre years. I just imagine the Sox being like that someday hopefully. I'm glad we aren't the Royals but you got to make the playoffs to be a consistent threat.

It should trump 10 division titles in a row, even if there was only a 1-year drought. I'll take the WS title every time if those are the choices.

SoxSpeed22
06-04-2013, 09:51 AM
After he got beat out for Miguel Cabrera, that was the end for KW as a GM. After that, he overpayed more for less, became more of a hot-head and just wasn't as effective.
I'm willing to give Hahn a chance. The drafting seems to have improved, Marco has been getting a lot of things right in Latin America. We just have to wait for some growth in the minors.

Domeshot17
06-04-2013, 10:00 AM
One thing that Williams did consistently well throughout his tenure was make small trades, and finding players off the wire. We need to continue to do that. Some savvy moves there can fill the roster, prevent us from signing any Wises, and occasionally you can find a gem.
More of his big trades were bad than good. I'd say his best trade was Freddie Garcia for Gio and Floyd.

Selling and rebuilding will be a long process. The Astros had a lot more to sell than we do. They got a lot of really good prospects, some of whom were low minor prospects, but with high potential. Their best deal was probably the Pence deal with the Phillies, where they refused the Dominic Brown AAA foolsgold, and went for 2 A/AA players with very high potential. But theirs will be a long road.

Ironic statement. I semi agree, he made a lot of "under the radar" moves (although he also struck out on a ton of under of the radar moves- Sisco, Erstad etc. etc. etc.). But the reason it is Ironic is didn't KW actually acquire Wise TWICE ?

BainesHOF
06-04-2013, 10:09 AM
I'm willing to give Hahn a chance. The drafting seems to have improved, Marco has been getting a lot of things right in Latin America.

Why do you say the drafting seems to have improved?

doublem23
06-04-2013, 10:13 AM
No Kiddin .Pretty good is not 5 straight playoff-less seasons and mediocre record after mediocre record. How anyone can say that is beyond me. They have not been pretty good lately , that's an extreme exaggeration. They are the poster boys for mediocrity. Whether the WS title cancels that out is a matter of opinion, but "pretty good" is a stretch. And the Cub's games most certainly mean a heck of a lot more to me and pretty much every other Sox fan I know than an Astros game.

So you're saying you'd rather be a Twins fan than a Sox fan? Because the Twins consistenly went to the playoffs for a good run there, only to bomb out every year. Yes, I would love if it the Sox made the playoffs more consistently, that's not the argument, but a World Series title does trump several years of ALDS and ALCS failure, IMO. And I am positive the majority of baseball fans agree with me.

Hitmen77
06-04-2013, 10:38 AM
That's fine, if you want to maintain such a ridiculously high standard of success, but mine are based on what is relative to the rest of the league. So please, do tell, how many teams out there would you say had a more sucessful run in KW's GM tenureship than the Sox? Obviously the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Cardinals, and Giants. That's 5 of 29 teams. Please, feel free to fill me in. Where are these other glorious streaks of championships across the Majors? Because I don't see them. Most teams exist like us, runs of good years and bad years and, hopefully, a year or two here when you get lucky, catch all the breaks, and win the whole thing. That's the reality for most baseball fans.

You forgot some:

http://mlb.mlb.com/phi/history/postseason_results.jsp

http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/atl/history/year_by_year_results.jsp

...as far as "runs of good years" go, the Sox are the only original franchise that has never made the playoffs in back to back years. I'm still waiting for our "run". Making the playoffs only 3 times in the AL Central/Wild Card era (which is now approaching 2 decades) isn't good enough IMO. If I had time, I'd look up all the teams that have done better than that.



You want to focus solely on the negative and apparently have no real concept of success or failure in baseball because I can guarantee you, at least 15, probably 20 other teams, would trade our last decade with theirs in a heartbeat. That that is a fact, and not opinion, is what you don't seem to comprehend. The Sox have been, more or less, pretty good lately.

Look, there's two seperate issues here:

1) Should KW still be working for the Sox? That I can't answer for anyone. That's a matter of opinion. I don't mind it; I don't want KW running the show as GM any more, but I think he's still a valuable asset to the organization's front office. But if someone were to come and say, "I think KW should have been fired," well, that's their opinion, which I respect.

2) Where the Sox relatively successful during KW's tenure? That is not an opinion. The answer to this is yes. Could the team have been more successful? Sure, they won 1 World Series title in 12 years. Could have won 11 more. But, there's a whole **** load of teams that didn't match that 1. That never got a chance. That didn't win nearly as regularly as the Sox did. These are numbers, not opinions. If you think the Sox blew a couple chances, could have been more successful, sure, I can see that. But you're still talking about a team that had a nice run of years, there.

Let's not get the two confused.

You're putting everything through the lens of 2005. That was 8 years ago and was a championship team that had a strong core of home grown talent and players the Sox acquired by trading valuable prospects......mostly players that the organization acquired before 2002.

That's not representative of the way this team has been run over the last decade....though, as you pointed out previously, some of the problems with player development are likely beyond KW's control.

Kenny may have done more harm than good but I don't think that the White Sox were anywhere close to being one of the 5-10 best teams in baseball during his tenure. He had a great year in 2005 but up until then teams like the Twins, the Yankees, the Red Sox, the A's, the Braves, the Cardinals, the Giants and the Dodgers were always consistently better than the White Sox. After 2005 you had those teams plus teams like the Rays, the Phillies, the Reds, the Brewers and the Tigers being better than the White Sox.

The fact that this organization is hand strung with bad contracts for declining veterans and has no talent in the minor leagues (and hasn't produced any since 2001) is his responsiblity as well. I know that some people like to say "Well as GM he was too focused on the major league roster," well the GM is also responsible for the draft and the minor leagues as well. You can do both, in the latter half of his tenure Kenny wasn't able to do either.

Excellent post.

asindc
06-04-2013, 11:07 AM
For those advocating the approach of "try something, anything!, to show the fans you care," keep in mind that these moves have been tried in the past few seasons:

Acquired Wise
Acquired Dunn
Let AJ walk to allow Flowers to start
Drafted Mitchell
Acquired Keppinger (early, but still)
Acquired De Aza
Acquired Wise
Let Rowand walk to allow BA to start
Acquired Griffey

I'm as frustrated as anybody, but I don't want to see moves made just for the sake of making them. I also don't believe that management is any less frustrated than we are. Are they the right people for the job? That's a different question.

SoxSpeed22
06-04-2013, 11:10 AM
Why do you say the drafting seems to have improved?It's too early to judge the 2012 draft, but they've had some of their 2010 and 2011 picks make progress. Sale and Reed look like All-Stars this year, Erik Johnson is probably our best prospect right now, Snodgress, Semien, Wilkins and Vance have progressed pretty well into AA. I think it is a small improvement compared to the mid-2000's where they got absolutely nothing out of any of their picks.

mahagga73
06-04-2013, 11:42 AM
It should trump 10 division titles in a row, even if there was only a 1-year drought. I'll take the WS title every time if those are the choices.
I feel the same , my point was , it was a one year magical season that has covered up KW deficiencies as a GM. Most teams that win it maintain a standard of some sort of excellence longer than a couple years. at least the ones that are perennial playoff and WS contenders.

Golden Sox
06-04-2013, 11:42 AM
Now that White Sox management is saying they might shakeup this team, I can't help but wonder what they're actually going to do. The only way I can see this team being better is through trades. If that is the case, who are they going to trade? I think we should have a thread/post asking who's going to be traded first. My guess would be Alexi Ramirez. If you can get somebody who can hit in a trade for him, I think he's gone. You can put Beckham at short and Keppinger at second. This gives Gilaspie third base full time.

TaylorStSox
06-04-2013, 11:53 AM
They went from drafting low ceiling/high floor players to ensure roster stability and everyone complained. They changed their philosophy to drafting high ceiling/high risk, toolsy players, and everyone complains. Sox fans... lol.

mahagga73
06-04-2013, 11:55 AM
Now that White Sox management is saying they might shakeup this team, I can't help but wonder what they're actually going to do. The only way I can see this team being better is through trades. If that is the case, who are they going to trade? I think we should have a thread/post asking who's going to be traded first. My guess would be Alexi Ramirez. If you can get somebody who can hit in a trade for him, I think he's gone. You can put Beckham at short and Keppinger at second. This gives Gilaspie third base full time.
I like the idea. Love his defense but he can't hit a lick anymore and his mental errors are just infuriating. How you make little league mental errors day after day being in the major leagues I just can't comprehend. The fact he hasn't hit for 2 years now makes you wonder if he isn't on the decline .

kobo
06-04-2013, 11:55 AM
You want to focus solely on the negative and apparently have no real concept of success or failure in baseball because I can guarantee you, at least 15, probably 20 other teams, would trade our last decade with theirs in a heartbeat. That that is a fact, and not opinion, is what you don't seem to comprehend. The Sox have been, more or less, pretty good lately.
Actually, this isn't a fact, this is your opinion. Unless you have been in contact with every MLB club and posed this question to them and actually received an answer all you are doing is speculating that this is how other clubs feel. There are no facts being presented in this argument at all other than the Sox had a decade that could be considered successful by others. But to imply or assert that these clubs would trade places with the Sox is speculative at best.

doublem23
06-04-2013, 12:00 PM
Actually, this isn't a fact, this is your opinion. Unless you have been in contact with every MLB club and posed this question to them and actually received an answer all you are doing is speculating that this is how other clubs feel. There are no facts being presented in this argument at all other than the Sox had a decade that could be considered successful by others. But to imply or assert that these clubs would trade places with the Sox is speculative at best.

You're honestly telling me other teams fans would trade a World Series for not a World Series? Because that would be... a little crazy to me.

mahagga73
06-04-2013, 12:02 PM
For those advocating the approach of "try something, anything!, to show the fans you care," keep in mind that these moves have been tried in the past few seasons:

Acquired Wise
Acquired Dunn
Let AJ walk to allow Flowers to start
Drafted Mitchell
Acquired Keppinger (early, but still)
Acquired De Aza
Acquired Wise
Let Rowand walk to allow BA to start
Acquired Griffey

I'm as frustrated as anybody, but I don't want to see moves made just for the sake of making them. I also don't believe that management is any less frustrated than we are. Are they the right people for the job? That's a different question.

True. Based on the premise it isn't worth trading any kind of decent pitching for a player who may or may not perform well , it probably isn't going to make any difference anyway. The luck may have ran out, we might be looking at a lost season. This team needs a complete revamping of the positional players.

TomBradley72
06-04-2013, 12:04 PM
Based on the final 5 years of his GM tenure (2008-2012)- KW should have been fired- not promoted.

Forever grateful for 2005- but based on the mediocrity from A, AA, AAA to the majors- he did not earn a promotion.

mahagga73
06-04-2013, 12:07 PM
You're honestly telling me other teams fans would trade a World Series for not a World Series? Because that would be... a little crazy to me.

05 is being used as a crutch to justify 5 years of bad management. I think that's the point a lot of people are making,not that they would trade it for division titles.

doublem23
06-04-2013, 12:16 PM
05 is being used as a crutch to justify 5 years of bad management. I think that's the point a lot of people are making,not that they would trade it for division titles.

Yeah, because the White Sox WON THE WORLD SERIES. Look, I'm sorry taht it happened because it throws an obvious and clear wrench into your argument, but it is what it is. Obviously we're all in agreement that it's preferable to win the division every year, go to the playoffs, and win the World Series some of those years. We all want to be the Yankees. That's the goal. But that's not the reality for almost every team besides the Yankees. 29 teams have to live in that world. So is it preferable to be the Sox, who may not win the division every year, but when they put together a good season, they're the best team in baseball and win the World Series? Or is it better to make the playoffs year in and year out, but fail in the postseason every year? I can't make that decision for everyone. I'll take the World Series.

FielderJones
06-04-2013, 12:16 PM
Here's an idea, let's list the 15 teams that would trade their last decade for ours in a heartbeat, and then kobo can make an argument that any of them should not be on the list.

Blue Jays, Orioles, Indians, Royals, Athletics, Mariners, Astros, Nationals, Mets, Pirates, Cubs, Reds, Brewers, Rockies, Padres.

doublem23
06-04-2013, 12:28 PM
Based on the final 5 years of his GM tenure (2008-2012)- KW should have been fired- not promoted.

Forever grateful for 2005- but based on the mediocrity from A, AA, AAA to the majors- he did not earn a promotion.

And that's fine, again, that's all personal opinion to everyone. If you think the end of his GM tenure warranted him being fired, that's fine, I understand and respect that opinion. I don't necessarily agree, however, because I think it's unfair to judge a person's performance solely on the bad without acknowledging the good. Am I glad that KW is out of the GM position with the Sox? Yes, sure, I am. But am I glad he's still offering his expertise to the organization? Time will tell, but, for now I'm OK with it.

TomBradley72
06-04-2013, 12:46 PM
And that's fine, again, that's all personal opinion to everyone. If you think the end of his GM tenure warranted him being fired, that's fine, I understand and respect that opinion. I don't necessarily agree, however, because I think it's unfair to judge a person's performance solely on the bad without acknowledging the good. Am I glad that KW is out of the GM position with the Sox? Yes, sure, I am. But am I glad he's still offering his expertise to the organization? Time will tell, but, for now I'm OK with it.

I just think 5 years is a pretty big window of time- it's not just a year or two-it's as long as Hemond had under JR, longer than Harrelson or Himes' tenure-

Rocky Soprano
06-04-2013, 12:48 PM
Yeah, because the White Sox WON THE WORLD SERIES. Look, I'm sorry taht it happened because it throws an obvious and clear wrench into your argument, but it is what it is. Obviously we're all in agreement that it's preferable to win the division every year, go to the playoffs, and win the World Series some of those years. We all want to be the Yankees. That's the goal. But that's not the reality for almost every team besides the Yankees. 29 teams have to live in that world. So is it preferable to be the Sox, who may not win the division every year, but when they put together a good season, they're the best team in baseball and win the World Series? Or is it better to make the playoffs year in and year out, but fail in the postseason every year? I can't make that decision for everyone. I'll take the World Series.

Great post and sums up exactly how I feel.
I would love the Sox to have the disposable income of the Yankees but they don't. I will be forever grateful for 2005. While it doesn't mean that it gives the organization a pass on winning or being competitive it does buy them some time. The key is how much.

If 10 years ago someone would have told me that in 05 the Sox were going to win the World Series but in turn they would be bad for the next 10 - 20 years, who wouldn't have taken that deal? The current team is very frustrating and I understand why many are very upset but some of the things being posted are just nuts.

doublem23
06-04-2013, 12:48 PM
I just think 5 years is a pretty big window of time- it's not just a year or two-it's as long as Hemond had under JR, longer than Harrelson or Himes' tenure-

No doubt, but he also had a much longer window of success in the Sox front office.

TomBradley72
06-04-2013, 12:59 PM
No doubt, but he also had a much longer window of success in the Sox front office.

I'd call 2001-2007 a success overall (due to the World Series, definitely NOT for the Wells, Ritchie, Koch acquisitions)- but previous to his GM role he oversaw the minor leagues- I'm not aware of any real track record of success in that role.

WhiteSox5187
06-04-2013, 01:40 PM
Yeah, because the White Sox WON THE WORLD SERIES. Look, I'm sorry taht it happened because it throws an obvious and clear wrench into your argument, but it is what it is. Obviously we're all in agreement that it's preferable to win the division every year, go to the playoffs, and win the World Series some of those years. We all want to be the Yankees. That's the goal. But that's not the reality for almost every team besides the Yankees. 29 teams have to live in that world. So is it preferable to be the Sox, who may not win the division every year, but when they put together a good season, they're the best team in baseball and win the World Series? Or is it better to make the playoffs year in and year out, but fail in the postseason every year? I can't make that decision for everyone. I'll take the World Series.

The piece of the argument that I think you are missing here is that with the way the playoffs are structured now, winning the World Series is a crapshoot. The last time the best team in baseball won the World Series might have been 2005 or maybe 2007 (I am not 100% sure on that so don't quote me). To win the World Series you have to obviously make the playoffs and a GM has a much greater say in constructing a team that makes the playoffs than how they actually do in the playoffs.

Kenny has done a very bad job of constructing teams that can get to the playoffs to give us a chance at winning the World Series. There have been other GMs, including teams like the Twins, who have given their teams that chance at least. So while the White Sox have more World Series titles than the Twins and Indians, their GMs at least built teams that had more opportunities to win than Kenny did. A bunch of teams would trade for our success in the playoffs in 2005, but I am not sure how much of that post season success should go to Kenny as opposed to Ozzie.

The real question is how many teams would trade the two chances in 12 years that Kenny has given the White Sox to win the World Series. Some teams like the Pirates and Royals certain would. But I think a lot of teams wouldn't be happy with having a shot at winning the World Series only once every 6 years.

doublem23
06-04-2013, 01:54 PM
The piece of the argument that I think you are missing here is that with the way the playoffs are structured now, winning the World Series is a crapshoot. The last time the best team in baseball won the World Series might have been 2005 or maybe 2007 (I am not 100% sure on that so don't quote me). To win the World Series you have to obviously make the playoffs and a GM has a much greater say in constructing a team that makes the playoffs than how they actually do in the playoffs.

Kenny has done a very bad job of constructing teams that can get to the playoffs to give us a chance at winning the World Series. There have been other GMs, including teams like the Twins, who have given their teams that chance at least. So while the White Sox have more World Series titles than the Twins and Indians, their GMs at least built teams that had more opportunities to win than Kenny did. A bunch of teams would trade for our success in the playoffs in 2005, but I am not sure how much of that post season success should go to Kenny as opposed to Ozzie.

The real question is how many teams would trade the two chances in 12 years that Kenny has given the White Sox to win the World Series. Some teams like the Pirates and Royals certain would. But I think a lot of teams wouldn't be happy with having a shot at winning the World Series only once every 6 years.

Oh, I'm well aware that the playoffs are a crapshoot, but you can't deny that in 2005 the Sox were the best team in the league.

But I think your argument is false, I believe, because winning the World Series still trumps not. I'm sorry but it just does.

SoxSpeed22
06-04-2013, 02:14 PM
I'm sure any Indians fan would give up all of those division titles from the 90's, 2001 and 2007 for a World Series title, just me though.

tsoxman
06-04-2013, 02:29 PM
Yeah, because the White Sox WON THE WORLD SERIES. Look, I'm sorry taht it happened because it throws an obvious and clear wrench into your argument, but it is what it is. Obviously we're all in agreement that it's preferable to win the division every year, go to the playoffs, and win the World Series some of those years. We all want to be the Yankees. That's the goal. But that's not the reality for almost every team besides the Yankees. 29 teams have to live in that world. So is it preferable to be the Sox, who may not win the division every year, but when they put together a good season, they're the best team in baseball and win the World Series? Or is it better to make the playoffs year in and year out, but fail in the postseason every year? I can't make that decision for everyone. I'll take the World Series.
So the "we won the WS in 2005" is the 'gotcha' point in this whole argument? Then what is the point of even watching this team now and going forward? Instead of buying game tickets, why not just buy a box DVD set from 2005?

doublem23
06-04-2013, 02:30 PM
The KW Era, sorted by overall winning percentage

doublem23
06-04-2013, 02:34 PM
So the "we won the WS in 2005" is the 'gotcha' point in this whole argument? Then what is the point of even watching this team now and going forward? Instead of buying game tickets, why not just buy a box DVD set from 2005?

I don't know? Being a fan? I guess I would say that people who only watch a sports team when they're good are pieces of ****. Why the **** are you even a Sox fan then? Join the Yankee bandwagon, you'll be much happier.

It's only a "gotcha" moment if you want to pretend like the Sox have been absolutely dreadful for the past decade or so, because, no, they haven't. Look at the chart above. There's 19 teams in the KW as GM era (2001-2012) who won fewer games than us and only one of those had a more illustrious playoff record, the D-Backs, who slide in with a World Series title in 2001 and made the playoffs 2 more times. Have the Sox been elite? No. Have they been good? Yes.

RKMeibalane
06-04-2013, 02:35 PM
The KW Era, sorted by overall winning percentage

That puts them eleventh out of thirty teams since 2001. I'm actually surprised that Texas has a lower winning percentage, although several of their teams during the Alex Rodriguez years were absolutely terrible, so that may explain why they're just below the Sox.

Harry Chappas
06-04-2013, 02:40 PM
I haven't read all of this thread but any guesses as to whom they privately met with? I can see getting mad if someone makes a mistake due to obvious laziness but for most of this team, yelling at them would be akin to yelling at an infant for filling their diaper. In most cases, they're not playing well because they're just not very good at baseball. In other cases, it's because they're skills have diminished with age (Konerko, Dunn).

asindc
06-04-2013, 02:54 PM
The KW Era, sorted by overall winning percentage

Based on that chart, there are only seven teams I would trade places with during the KW era.

RKMeibalane
06-04-2013, 02:56 PM
Based on that chart, there are only seven teams I would trade places with during the KW era.

Which is what I think doublem23 was pointing out. As frustrating as the past few seasons have been, there aren't that many organizations who've had it better than the Sox since 2001.

DonnieDarko
06-04-2013, 02:58 PM
The KW Era, sorted by overall winning percentage

11th best winning percentage in the league during his tenure? Just above average? I'll take it, but of course I'd like better...

Hitmen77
06-04-2013, 03:00 PM
Oh, I'm well aware that the playoffs are a crapshoot, but you can't deny that in 2005 the Sox were the best team in the league.

But I think your argument is false, I believe, because winning the World Series still trumps not. I'm sorry but it just does.

The 2005 championship tells me how good the Sox were at (gradually) putting together a championship team over the decade or so before 2005.

It doesn't tell me how well this franchise has been run by Sox management over the last 8 years...or how this farm system has become almost devoid of any new quality talent over the last 12 years or so.

The KW Era, sorted by overall winning percentage

When sorted by playoff appearances during that time, we drop to a tie for 17th place. Every team ahead of us in winning pct. also has at least twice as many playoff appearances.

captain54
06-04-2013, 03:11 PM
what actually are ya'll hoping to accomplish with the "we suck now, but all is not lost because we didn't suck in the past" argument?.. the only valid reason I can see to bring all of that up is possibly they did it before they can do it again?

other than that, its a really silly argument, filled with more holes than a piece of fine aged Swiss cheddar

you can't just take 05 and focus on that, and ignore all the other eye opening issues with the Sox in the KW era...

first of all, the Sox aren't even in the top 10 in winning percentage.. and of the top 11, they have the least amount of playoff appearances, also.. there are a good number of teams with a worse winning percentages that have more playoff appearances.. in smaller markets with smaller payrolls...not to mention that the Sox play in a consistently weak division with small market teams..

you can twist it a number of ways, and/or look at it as glass half full/half empty, but to chastise people for complaining about the franchise by continuing to trot out 05 with "we won the WS in 05, so the organization thus has been successful under KW", is pretty shortsighted..



.

ChiSoxGal85
06-04-2013, 03:15 PM
I haven't read all of this thread but any guesses as to whom they privately met with? I can see getting mad if someone makes a mistake due to obvious laziness but for most of this team, yelling at them would be akin to yelling at an infant for filling their diaper. In most cases, they're not playing well because they're just not very good at baseball. In other cases, it's because they're skills have diminished with age (Konerko, Dunn).
I read that Flowers and Dunn were two of them. Can't remember where I read it though.

RKMeibalane
06-04-2013, 03:17 PM
I read that Flowers and Dunn were two of them. Can't remember where I read it though.

I think Dunn's finished, so getting on his case is pointless unless the Sox have concerns about his work habits and conditioning, issues that I remember coming up in 2011. As for Flowers, I assumed he would be one of the players involved, as he never seems to have his head in the game in spite of his playing one of the most important positions on the field.

asindc
06-04-2013, 03:34 PM
what actually are ya'll hoping to accomplish with the "we suck now, but all is not lost because we didn't suck in the past" argument?.. the only valid reason I can see to bring all of that up is possibly they did it before they can do it again?

other than that, its a really silly argument, filled with more holes than a piece of fine aged Swiss cheddar

you can't just take 05 and focus on that, and ignore all the other eye opening issues with the Sox in the KW era...

first of all, the Sox aren't even in the top 10 in winning percentage.. and of the top 11, they have the least amount of playoff appearances, also.. there are a good number of teams with a worse winning percentages that have more playoff appearances.. in smaller markets with smaller payrolls...not to mention that the Sox play in a consistently weak division with small market teams..

you can twist it a number of ways, and/or look at it as glass half full/half empty, but to chastise people for complaining about the franchise by continuing to trot out 05 with "we won the WS in 05, so the organization thus has been successful under KW", is pretty shortsighted..



.

I won't speak for anyone else, but my posts on this issue are in response to the ridiculous suggestion that the Sox lucked up to win the 05 WS and any other successes during KW's tenure. It seems to be suggested to augment the argument that there is no reason to believe that current management can turn things around. While that might be true (and it is something I definitely don't argue), pretending that current management hasn't done some good things is not persuasive to me.

By the way, it is hypocritical to say "World Series or bust" but ignore the fact that only seven other teams have a better success rate in that regard than the Sox in the KW era (again, for emphasis, that doesn't mean that he should not be fired now). By the way, everyone you say is chastising you is also critical of current Sox management and in particular KW for certain failures. So either you are missing the point here or just ignoring it. As I said earlier, making moves just for the sake of making moves doesn't cut it in my book. Identifying the real weaknesses and rectifying those problems is the way to go. If KW (and/or Hahn) ends up being fired after such a (hopefully) thorough and well-reasoned assessment, then so be it. But pretending that the current management hasn't had exceptional success should not part of that assessment, IMO.

Harry Chappas
06-04-2013, 04:03 PM
what actually are ya'll hoping to accomplish with the "we suck now, but all is not lost because we didn't suck in the past" argument?.. the only valid reason I can see to bring all of that up is possibly they did it before they can do it again?

other than that, its a really silly argument, filled with more holes than a piece of fine aged Swiss cheddar

you can't just take 05 and focus on that, and ignore all the other eye opening issues with the Sox in the KW era...

first of all, the Sox aren't even in the top 10 in winning percentage.. and of the top 11, they have the least amount of playoff appearances, also.. there are a good number of teams with a worse winning percentages that have more playoff appearances.. in smaller markets with smaller payrolls...not to mention that the Sox play in a consistently weak division with small market teams..

you can twist it a number of ways, and/or look at it as glass half full/half empty, but to chastise people for complaining about the franchise by continuing to trot out 05 with "we won the WS in 05, so the organization thus has been successful under KW", is pretty shortsighted..



.

Picking nits here, but is there such a thing as a swiss cheddar? Does it have a lot of holes?

WhiteSox5187
06-04-2013, 04:38 PM
Oh, I'm well aware that the playoffs are a crapshoot, but you can't deny that in 2005 the Sox were the best team in the league.

But I think your argument is false, I believe, because winning the World Series still trumps not. I'm sorry but it just does.

By that logic though Kenny is as good of a GM as John Schuerholtz because they both only won one World Series with the Braves even though Schuerholtz won 14 division titles and several pennants.

captain54
06-04-2013, 04:49 PM
Picking nits here, but is there such a thing as a swiss cheddar? Does it have a lot of holes?

my bad.. "swiss CHEESE" I guess if you ordered swiss cheddar you would order half with holes and half without and sharp

doublem23
06-04-2013, 05:07 PM
By that logic though Kenny is as good of a GM as John Schuerholtz because they both only won one World Series with the Braves even though Schuerholtz won 14 division titles and several pennants.

No, that's not my argument, I'm merely arguing you're not allowed to just omit a World Series title from the little narrative you're developing because it disrupts the argument you so desperately wish was true.

Whether or not you think 14 division titles an no rings is better or worse than 2 division titles and 1 ring is on you. Again, I'm just merely pointing out that from 2001-2012, the Sox were better than 2/3 of the league. Take that as you see it.

Harry Chappas
06-04-2013, 05:09 PM
my bad.. "swiss CHEESE" I guess if you ordered swiss cheddar you would order half with holes and half without and sharp

As a matter of full-disclosure, I had to google 'Swiss Cheddar' because I thought I was missing out on something.

cards press box
06-04-2013, 05:23 PM
Which is what I think doublem23 was pointing out. As frustrating as the past few seasons have been, there aren't that many organizations who've had it better than the Sox since 2001.

That is definitely true. The Sox are almost always above .500, have made the playoffs a few times and won the World Series. And winning the Series is a big deal. Consider this -- in the last 20 years, only four AL teams have won the World Series: the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels and the White Sox. That is it.

Rocky Soprano
06-04-2013, 05:28 PM
That is definitely true. The Sox are almost always above .500, have made the playoffs a few times and won the World Series. And winning the Series is a big deal. Consider this -- in the last 20 years, only four AL teams have won the World Series: the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels and the White Sox. That is it.

Wow! I didn't know that little tidbit.
Pretty interesting.

Again, I understand the frustration but some act like the Sox are the Cubs.

captain54
06-04-2013, 05:33 PM
That is definitely true. The Sox are almost always above .500, have made the playoffs a few times and won the World Series. And winning the Series is a big deal. Consider this -- in the last 20 years, only four AL teams have won the World Series: the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels and the White Sox. That is it.

if yur going back 20 yrs you'd have to include 93.. So add Toronto.. who won in 93... and 92

kittle42
06-04-2013, 05:48 PM
Again, I understand the frustration but some act like the Sox are the Cubs.

One WS win is significantly more outstanding than none, but postseason-wise, not much difference otherwise.

TaylorStSox
06-04-2013, 05:51 PM
The 2005 championship tells me how good the Sox were at (gradually) putting together a championship team over the decade or so before 2005.

It doesn't tell me how well this franchise has been run by Sox management over the last 8 years...or how this farm system has become almost devoid of any new quality talent over the last 12 years or so.



When sorted by playoff appearances during that time, we drop to a tie for 17th place. Every team ahead of us in winning pct. also has at least twice as many playoff appearances.

How many pitchers on this staff spent time in the Sox minor league system?The farm hasn't been "devoid of new, quality talent over the last 12 years." Even right now, there are a few quality position prospects, but they all had a real rough early part of the year. Thompson, Sanchez and Hawkins are still legit. I'm not saying the farm isn't a problem, but it could be worse.

SI1020
06-04-2013, 05:57 PM
I've always maintained that Kenny was a better GM when he had no money to work with. Once he won a WS and got the keys to the vault, he spent fortunes on the wrong players. He had the formula and went away from it.

What are his duties? Staying out of the way, I would guess. A resounding yes. As a result he left the team in a mess.

BainesHOF
06-04-2013, 06:06 PM
Melton said on the Score this morning that Flowers, Dunn and Ramirez had meetings.

TaylorStSox
06-04-2013, 06:11 PM
Towards the end, IMO KW had some bad luck. Most of his moves looked good at the time. Swisher really burned him as did Dunn. The Jackson/Hudson trade made sense. Nonetheless, I think he understood they to win as the GM of the second team in the second city, he had to take risks. Even when Reinsdorf has ok'd the acquisition of big time FA's, it's been hard to lure them. The Sox just aren't that attractive of an organization to players.

Even right now, this team should be average offensively, but PK, Keppinger, Flowers and Dunn are really killing them.

soltrain21
06-04-2013, 06:13 PM
Towards the end, IMO KW had some bad luck. Most of his moves looked good at the time. Swisher really burned him as did Dunn. The Jackson/Hudson trade made sense. Nonetheless, I think he understood they to win as the GM of the second team in the second city, he had to take risks. Even when Reinsdorf has ok'd the acquisition of big time FA's, it's been hard to lure them. The Sox just aren't that attractive of an organization to players.

Even right now, this team should be average offensively, but PK, Keppinger, Flowers and Dunn are really killing them.

No it didn't.

TaylorStSox
06-04-2013, 06:17 PM
No it didn't.

They were trying to win now. Hudson was struggling and not getting along with Cooper. Jackson pitched well for us. It wasn't exactly crippling, especially considering Hudson hasn't done much in 2 years.

MISoxfan
06-04-2013, 08:34 PM
Small sample size and all, but Konerko's hit .355/.394/.516 over the past 2 weeks. We could use a Frater Konerko-meter thread to really get him going for the next 4 years.

slavko
06-04-2013, 09:31 PM
Based on the final 5 years of his GM tenure (2008-2012)- KW should have been fired- not promoted.


I think he was fired but he doesn't know it yet. He is not a Paxson equivalent, although both of them are unprofessional hotheads.

I read that Flowers and Dunn were two of them. Can't remember where I read it though.

Melton on WSCR. Bill's a straight shooter.

my bad.. "swiss CHEESE" I guess if you ordered swiss cheddar you would order half with holes and half without and sharp

I thought this was an instance of calling all nuts "peanuts." "Buy a pound of pistachio peanuts when you're at the market." It might be a rural thing.

Small sample size and all, but Konerko's hit .355/.394/.516 over the past 2 weeks. We could use a Frater Konerko-meter thread to really get him going for the next 4 years.

Power, please.

MISoxfan
06-04-2013, 09:49 PM
Gotta start somewhere.

Domeshot17
06-04-2013, 10:39 PM
So basically, because Kenny Williams got lucky in 2005, he gets a free pass, that is what we determined?

The 2005 White Sox were a special team to all of us for obvious reasons, but to pretend they did not luck out with a **** ton of career years is just willful ignorance.

Also, this idea that the Sox sometimes are weak, but when they are good, they are best, does not fly, because of the years since the world series, where we got our asses kicked in the playoffs.

Any team can get lucky one year, but some teams are just consistently good, we are not one of them. We do not present a tradition of winning or anything special. We are in a terrible position right now, based on pure talent, a bottom 10 team, maybe the worst farm in all of baseball, and no money to spend....

Domeshot17
06-04-2013, 11:04 PM
I don't really dislike KW, I do not think he was bad, but I can admit he got lucky with his chosen style to win (build a 82 game winner and hope they over achieve).

But here is my problem:

Outside RARE examples like Tampa, given circumstances beyond their control (lack of fan base)..... Winning cures all. Teams that consistently win sustain higher pay rolls. They get bigger TV deals, and draw more fans. They get exciting players who are marketable, and make more money, and they spend on young talent in the draft.

The Yankees do not operate with the money they do because they have the most expensive tickets, they have the most expensive tickets because of the money they operate with. How did they get to that level? They Won! In LA, the Dodgers and Angels are proving you do not need to be on the East Coast to spend mega money. It has yet to result to much for them, but hell, at least they tried.

Sure, we probably won't ever be the Yankees because the Cubs out operated us, but we could be the Cardinals, the Tigers, if we just consistently won.

Hitmen77
06-04-2013, 11:08 PM
How many pitchers on this staff spent time in the Sox minor league system?The farm hasn't been "devoid of new, quality talent over the last 12 years." Even right now, there are a few quality position prospects, but they all had a real rough early part of the year. Thompson, Sanchez and Hawkins are still legit. I'm not saying the farm isn't a problem, but it could be worse.

Developing pitching has been less of a problem than position players. Sale and Reed are obvious successes. No complaints there. But after that, it's not like we're cranking out high quality pitchers either. Quintana was a good Rule V pick up.

As far as position players go, I stand by the statement that you quoted. What position player has the Sox drafted in the last 12 years that has turned out to be an above-average MLB player? This has definitely been a problem for the Sox. Devoid of talent pretty much sums it up for me and I can't see how anyone could argue otherwise. I'm not sure how much worse that "worst farm system" they can be. I suppose if the Sox start turning out enough strong pitching prospects, maybe some of them can be traded for quality position players to fill those holes in our organization.

I agree that the prospects you mentioned and a few others too sound promising. So maybe things indeed are getting better. I gather they're at least a year if not more away from being MLB ready, so we'll see maybe in 2015 how these guys pan out.

Brian26
06-04-2013, 11:12 PM
So basically, because Kenny Williams got lucky in 2005, he gets a free pass, that is what we determined?

The 2005 White Sox were a special team to all of us for obvious reasons, but to pretend they did not luck out with a **** ton of career years is just willful ignorance.

Also, this idea that the Sox sometimes are weak, but when they are good, they are best, does not fly, because of the years since the world series, where we got our asses kicked in the playoffs.

Any team can get lucky one year, but some teams are just consistently good, we are not one of them. We do not present a tradition of winning or anything special. We are in a terrible position right now, based on pure talent, a bottom 10 team, maybe the worst farm in all of baseball, and no money to spend....

Huh?

First of all, any team that wins the World Series does so with luck and a handful of guys that have career years. However, to imply the Sox weren't a very good team that deserved to win is baffling. The "career year" guys were in fact mostly fringe guys. If you look at the top players on that team, 2005 wasn't their best year. Using your argument, the Sox actually had more bad luck in 2004 and 2006 than anyone else. That core of guys in 04 could have won before the injuries to Mags and Frank. I just don't get this kind of post from a Sox fan. This is the typical remark I would hear from a dumbass Cubs fan.

amsteel
06-04-2013, 11:28 PM
Melton said on the Score this morning that Flowers, Dunn and Ramirez had meetings.

Implying players don't normally have meetings? That's a company line to feed to people that equates to "look guys we're totally doing stuff behind the scenes, we promise".

JB98
06-05-2013, 12:28 AM
Melton said on the Score this morning that Flowers, Dunn and Ramirez had meetings.

I was gonna say, Ramirez and De Aza better be on that list.

BainesHOF
06-05-2013, 12:33 AM
I was gonna say, Ramirez and De Aza better be on that list.

Melton named those players casually in conversation. I wouldn't be surprised if De Aza and perhaps others had meetings, too. De Aza definitely deserved a talk.

billyvsox
06-05-2013, 12:43 AM
Regarding Phegley, I realize that he may not cut it in the bigs, but when you are hitting big and playing well at triple a, and the guys above you in the majors stink, you have defiantly deserved a call up.

It would be discouraging to Phegley to not call him up IMO for simply that reason.

asindc
06-05-2013, 07:34 AM
So basically, because Kenny Williams got lucky in 2005, he gets a free pass, that is what we determined?

The 2005 White Sox were a special team to all of us for obvious reasons, but to pretend they did not luck out with a **** ton of career years is just willful Iignorance.

Also, this idea that the Sox sometimes are weak, but when they are good, they are best, does not fly, because of the years since the world series, where we got our asses kicked in the playoffs.

Any team can get lucky one year, but some teams are just consistently good, we are not one of them. We do not present a tradition of winning or anything special. We are in a terrible position right now, based on pure talent, a bottom 10 team, maybe the worst farm in all of baseball, and no money to spend....

That is complete bull****. The list of players on the 2005 Sox who had career years that year:

Contreras
Pollitte
Cotts
Hermanson

Meanwhile, the team had to overcome the following:

Replacing their Opening Day closer.
Injury to the 2nd string closer.
Using a rookie closer in the heat of the pennant race and playoffs.
Almost season-long injury to starting DH.
Significant injury to leadoff hitter.
Significant injury to starting 3B.
Significant injury to 5th starter, forcing the use of a rookie starter in heat of pennant race.

When the team was relatively healthy, it played just as it was designed to play. Ask Scott Podsednik. By the way, the same team (with Thome replacing Frank) won 90 games the next year with Buehrle being the worst qualifying starter in the majors, among other very drastic fall offs in performance. Luck my ass.

Jurr
06-05-2013, 07:38 AM
This meeting stuff is ridiculous.

What the hell are you going to tell Adam Dunn?
"Ummm...Adam...yeahhh...we're going to need you to see the ball better and make more contact."
"Alexei....yeahhh...your English isn't great, but we need you to start giving words of encouragement to Konerko. He seems down."

"Tyler...we kind of need you to start playing baseball. That would be great."

This team does not need a pep rally, a stern lecture, or a sports psychologist.
It needs an ENEMA. Flush the crap out.
Big contracts, bad attitudes, and declining bodies. Hahn should be spending his time walking to Kenny Williams' cubicle and wrapping a wiffle ball bat around his noggin.

Domeshot17
06-05-2013, 10:15 AM
Huh?

First of all, any team that wins the World Series does so with luck and a handful of guys that have career years. However, to imply the Sox weren't a very good team that deserved to win is baffling. The "career year" guys were in fact mostly fringe guys. If you look at the top players on that team, 2005 wasn't their best year. Using your argument, the Sox actually had more bad luck in 2004 and 2006 than anyone else. That core of guys in 04 could have won before the injuries to Mags and Frank. I just don't get this kind of post from a Sox fan. This is the typical remark I would hear from a dumbass Cubs fan.


I would actually agree with you mostly, the 2004 and 2006 White Sox were probably more talented teams.

I also fully agree that you need luck to win a world series. This is not the NBA where the best team usually wins, Baseball is a lot like Hockey, where a couple hot or cold guys make or break a title.... Injuries Also....

My point was that because of this crapshoot, missing the playoffs so much is not a good thing! It prevents us from getting lucky and going on a run.

Tragg
06-05-2013, 02:23 PM
That is complete bull****. The list of players on the 2005 Sox who had career years that year:

Contreras
Pollitte
Cotts
Hermanson


Also Garland and Iguchi. That's 5 pitchers...that's why we won. They were great. Also, it was one of Konerko's top 2 or 3 years.

doublem23
06-05-2013, 02:46 PM
Also Garland and Iguchi. That's 5 pitchers...that's why we won. They were great. Also, it was one of Konerko's top 2 or 3 years.

I would add Podsednik to that list, too, although he was more done in by the injury bug than being a bad player who caught fire.

Konerko did have a great year in 2005, but that's more to do because he was 29 years old and right in the middle of his prime years than it has to do with him having a flukey good season. His production in 2004 and 2006 was very similar to what he did at the plate in 2005. Probably every championship level team is going to have at least 1 star player around the age of 26-31 having a solid season. That's a lot less indicative of luck than a guy who just stinks his entire career except for one year (a la Herbert Perry in 2000). Again, sure, it's nice that Paul had one of his best years at the right time, but that's more the result of good planning; the Sox traded Carlos Lee and let Magglio Ordonez walk in the off-season leading up to the '05 season. The Sox had already deemed Konerko the foundation they would build their offense around. That he rewarded their decision is more indicative of good planning and scouting on the Sox's part than anything else.

tsoxman
06-05-2013, 03:12 PM
what actually are ya'll hoping to accomplish with the "we suck now, but all is not lost because we didn't suck in the past" argument?.. the only valid reason I can see to bring all of that up is possibly they did it before they can do it again?

other than that, its a really silly argument, filled with more holes than a piece of fine aged Swiss cheddar

you can't just take 05 and focus on that, and ignore all the other eye opening issues with the Sox in the KW era.
.
This and to use the "well you aren't much of a fan if you do not support the team" argument is also weak. I have been to a few games thus far and the team has just been brutal to watch. I can take bad, but offensively bad, no.

Tragg
06-05-2013, 04:43 PM
I would add Podsednik to that list, too, although he was more done in by the injury bug than being a bad player who caught fire.

Konerko did have a great year in 2005, but that's more to do because he was 29 years old and right in the middle of his prime years than it has to do with him having a flukey good season.
Indeed.

And quality players right in their prime are what we desperately lack.