PDA

View Full Version : reverse effect


depy48
01-07-2004, 08:09 PM
Ever since the playoff berth in 2000, the whitesox have made a move each offseason which brought the fans and the organization applauding. Everyone agreed that the sox were then destined to make the playoffs, yet none of these moves have payed off. First there was David Wells, and the sox ended up in 2nd place. The year after brought Todd Ritchie, and the sox finished in 2nd place. Last year saw Bartolo Colon in a whitesox uni, and still the sox finished in second place. Dont get me wrong, i jumped on the Colon bandwagon a mere second after the signing. I have my #40 jersey waiting to be worn in March, and no doubt i'll break it out whenever they play. (sidenote: the sox are 9-0 when i wore the jersey to a home game). Anyways, maybe a lack of a big move will have a reverse effect. Now sox fans arent all electric over some big move, and expectations are slightly lowered. To my memory, wasnt Herbert Perry and Cal Eldred the big additions prior to the 2000 season? Maybe the lack of big moves might just end up being what the whitesox need. Believers become Acheivers, and i think a whitesox pennant in 2004 will happen

Daver
01-07-2004, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by depy48
Ever since the playoff berth in 2000, the whitesox have made a move each offseason which brought the fans and the organization applauding. Everyone agreed that the sox were then destined to make the playoffs, yet none of these moves have payed off. First there was David Wells, and the sox ended up in 2nd place. The year after brought Todd Ritchie, and the sox finished in 2nd place. Last year saw Bartolo Colon in a whitesox uni, and still the sox finished in second place. Dont get me wrong, i jumped on the Colon bandwagon a mere second after the signing. I have my #40 jersey waiting to be worn in March, and no doubt i'll break it out whenever they play. (sidenote: the sox are 9-0 when i wore the jersey to a home game). Anyways, maybe a lack of a big move will have a reverse effect. Now sox fans arent all electric over some big move, and expectations are slightly lowered. To my memory, wasnt Herbert Perry and Cal Eldred the big additions prior to the 2000 season? Maybe the lack of big moves might just end up being what the whitesox need. Believers become Acheivers, and i think a whitesox pennant in 2004 will happen


Hey welcome aboard! :redneck

pearso66
01-07-2004, 08:18 PM
Good outlook depy. Welcome aboard.

I havn't been too worried by the lack of movement. Yes I would have liked to see something, but they aren't that bad of a team right now. Do I want to see Rowand in CF? not really, but it could be worse. If this team made a big move, and still finished 2nd, they would probably let that player walk after the season anyway. then we'd be in the same place. If we make a big move, great I'm all for it. But don't make a move for the sake of a move. see Juan Uribe.

jeremyb1
01-07-2004, 09:10 PM
Good post. I think you underscore a few key points.

First of all, there has been a great deal of complaining about our inactivity this offseason but just because we make a big move does not mean the move will be beneficial for the club (Wells, Ritchie, Koch).

Additionally, even if you do substantially improve your team through a trade (Everett, Colon) that is by no means a guarantee you will play well. Just as we made moves to improve the team and then lost due to poor luck and several underachieving players, we could just as easily fail to make any majors moves to improve the team and play over our heads due to good luck and career years.

A. Cavatica
01-07-2004, 09:13 PM
I dispute that the Sox have made a big move each year that gets the fans applauding -- Todd Ritchie was a questionable move from the start, especially with the talent we gave up.

And I dispute that we have done poorly in the years we made big moves. The big move in 2000 wasn't the acquisition of Valentin and Eldred, it was the SUBTRACTION of Navarro -- and *that* was overwhelmingly popular.

Hangar18
01-08-2004, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1

.... just because we make a big move does not mean the move will be beneficial for the club (Wells, Ritchie, Koch).


The Moves were done for the following reasons

* Wells- great concept, but gave up too much
* Ritchie - foolish concept of avoiding signing Established Pitcher by trading for a .500 pitcher in hopes he would become the next Lieber. Dumb
* Koch - Salary Motivated. Sox feared paying Foulke in the future, so figured a "switch" by acquiring Koch (under the guise of needing a better RP) File this trade under "Trade made for Salary Reasons We get Burned Again"

MetalliSox
01-08-2004, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
The Moves were done for the following reasons

* Wells- great concept, but gave up too much


Yeah, it was tough watching Sirotka win 20 games for Toronto. Man, that Brian Simmons is hitting the crap out of the ball...where is he? Did I even get his name right?

Maximo
01-08-2004, 10:07 AM
First of all, this is my first post. Been reading all of you guys for a while and I must say.....there is a lot of talent on this message board. Whatever side of the issue, you not only know your stuff, but you all possess a unique knack for putting into words.

That being said....I have to agree with the thought that no activity this off season is not yet a reason for alarm. That is, if the only goal is to win the AL Central. This division is so weak, the present Sox team with a little luck is still capable of competing.

However, I've been a Sox fan since '59 and time is beginning to run out for me. They are truly the only professional sports team I really give damn about and I would like just once to be a fan of an organization that strives to be the best there is all facets of the operation. That means not only competing for the "big banana" at the Major League level every year, but hiring the right people to be successful at the lower levels as well. Throw in an ownership who wants to put the fans first by striving to give them something to be proud of would be helpful, too.

In short, after all these years, I want the Chicago White Sox to be the
organization that sets the bar for everybody else. I mean....is that too much to ask? If you want to be the best, then start acting like it. Trouble is...the guy paying the bills doesn't want it have as bad as most people on this board and until someone puts a new philosophy into this franchise, we'll just have to continue to be satisfied with striving to win what is arguably the laughing stock of the divisions in baseball.

Oh well...I suppose we can continue to root for who ever is playing the Cubs.

CubKilla
01-08-2004, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by depy48
Believers become Acheivers, and i think a whitesox pennant in 2004 will happen

That'll never happen.

If the Sox win their Division, it'll be three and out just like in 2000.

CubKilla
01-08-2004, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
* Wells- great concept, but gave up too much

Sirotka hasn't pitched since the trade (I don't think) and I don't even recall who else we traded with him. At least D Wells won a few games for the Sox.

I have to disagree that we gave up too much.

miker
01-08-2004, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Maximo
In short, after all these years, I want the Chicago White Sox to be the organization that sets the bar for everybody else. I mean....is that too much to ask? :reinsy
"Yep!"

depy48
01-08-2004, 10:25 AM
maybe the slogan for the 2004 campaign should be
"better to be lucky than good"
anyways the point i'm trying to make, without a major aquisition, maybe the whitesox will play more as a cohesive unit, like they did in 2000, propelling them to the playoffs.

ode to veeck
01-08-2004, 11:06 AM
Maximo,

WELCOME TO WSI!!!

Paulwny
01-08-2004, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Maximo


I've been a Sox fan since '59 and time is beginning to run out for me. continue to be satisfied with striving to win what is arguably the laughing stock of the divisions in baseball.



You are not alone, a few of us in the same situation.

Hangar18
01-08-2004, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by KonerkosHip
Yeah, it was tough watching Sirotka win 20 games for Toronto. Man, that Brian Simmons is hitting the crap out of the ball...where is he? Did I even get his name right?

That was meant for the END RESULT, was we simply Released Wells when he wouldve Signed for the Minimum, per his request, because he got Injured. SO in theory, by letting him go,
we Got NOTHING for the whole trade......

Brian26
01-08-2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by depy48
To my memory, wasnt Herbert Perry and Cal Eldred the big additions prior to the 2000 season?

Milkman was picked up after the season began, but the Sox got Eldred and Jose from the Brewers prior to the season.

jeremyb1
01-08-2004, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
The Moves were done for the following reasons

* Wells- great concept, but gave up too much
* Ritchie - foolish concept of avoiding signing Established Pitcher by trading for a .500 pitcher in hopes he would become the next Lieber. Dumb
* Koch - Salary Motivated. Sox feared paying Foulke in the future, so figured a "switch" by acquiring Koch (under the guise of needing a better RP) File this trade under "Trade made for Salary Reasons We get Burned Again"

The problem with the Wells deal was that Sirotka had outperformed Wells the previous season, made much less money, and was far younger. We would've been burned incredibly badly if not for Sirotka's injury. Wells made 8 million I believe. We most likely could've signed a more effective starter for less money but we overpayed for "veteran experience".

As far as Koch goes either Kenny sorely lacks foresight or the supposed salary factors were not the true motivation for the deal. If we truly believed Foulke was equally good or better than Koch, there was no reason to do the trade. Sure we had Koch for a longer period of time but there was no reason to believe we would end up paying him less than we'd end up paying Foulke to resign him. The market was already so depressed at that point that it should've been obvious that Koch would make as much in arbitration as a similar pitcher such as Foulke would on the open market. Sure enough Foulke signed for as much as we're paying Koch this season. If Foulke had chosen not to resign with us we could've signed Hawkins, Guardado, or Urbina for less than Koch is making. Personally I'd like to think KW has some understanding of baseball's current economics so I tend to think that he viewed Koch as the better pitcher due to the fact that he through harder than Foulke and collected more saves the previous seasons.