PDA

View Full Version : If SOX Cut Payroll Again this year .... Will You attend More or Less games?


Hangar18
09-02-2004, 02:45 PM
Timely question, with another playoff-less offseason fast approaching.

duke of dorwood
09-02-2004, 02:47 PM
I wont go there to see us get homered to death by other teams

CubKilla
09-02-2004, 02:55 PM
This offseason should only be described as "spectacular" for me to set one foot inside USCF and actually spend one cent on the, most likely, cheap product JR will put out on the field.

soxtalker
09-02-2004, 02:58 PM
It depends on what they do with the dollars that they do spend. I don't make decisions on whether to go to games based on the payroll. My (and most fans, I believe) enthusiasm depends on how they are playing and how competitive they are.

Now, you may assume that payroll is correlated with team play and competitiveness, but I think that there are other factors that have just as much impact. Teams such as the Twins and A's constantly show us how well a team can play with lower payroll. While some of this is due to luck and factors peculiar to the individual teams, we don't seem to excel in the "smartness" of our organization.

Tekijawa
09-02-2004, 03:04 PM
I thought they upped the payroll over last year this year?

Hangar18
09-02-2004, 03:04 PM
It depends on what they do with the dollars that they do spend. I don't make decisions on whether to go to games based on the payroll. My (and most fans, I believe) enthusiasm depends on how they are playing and how competitive they are.

Now, you may assume that payroll is correlated with team play and competitiveness, but I think that there are other factors that have just as much impact. Teams such as the Twins and A's constantly show us how well a team can play with lower payroll. While some of this is due to luck and factors peculiar to the individual teams, we don't seem to excel in the "smartness" of our organization.
well, this is a good response, but in watching this team in the last 10 yrs,
and seeing how A cut in our Payroll (or refusing to spend to get over the top)
has cost us (No division titles since 2000) dearly ......... I can SAFELY ASSUME that Not Spending again in 2005 will yield the SAME RESULTS

kittle42
09-02-2004, 03:10 PM
I thought it would be hard to stay away the last 2 months of this season, but it has not, turning down free tickets and the like, even.

Therefore, I can safely say that, if the Sox do not make an effort to spend like the major-market team they are (i.e. something like the northsiders did last offseason), I will buy my Starting 9 Plan and leave it at that, about a third of the games I usually attend.

Wealz
09-02-2004, 03:24 PM
The last thing you want to do is give more money to Kenny Williams to misappropriate.

anewman35
09-02-2004, 03:41 PM
I thought they upped the payroll over last year this year?
They did. As usual, Hanger isn't letting facts get in the way of his arguements.

Wealz
09-02-2004, 03:46 PM
This offseason should only be described as "spectacular" for me to set one foot inside USCF and actually spend one cent on the, most likely, cheap product JR will put out on the field.
How much will you spend on the team if the offseason is spectacular?

Randar68
09-02-2004, 03:47 PM
The last thing you want to do is give more money to Kenny Williams to misappropriate.
The agenda continues.

CubKilla
09-02-2004, 03:50 PM
How much will you spend on the team if the offseason is spectacular?
My usual before 2004. Alot.

Wealz
09-02-2004, 03:52 PM
My usual before 2004. Alot.
Season tickets?

Wealz
09-02-2004, 03:53 PM
The agenda continues.
Right.

CubKilla
09-02-2004, 03:57 PM
Season tickets?
I'd do the 27 game package if the team made serious contention-minded moves. Pretty much the best I could do though with my job since I work different shifts.

maurice
09-02-2004, 04:15 PM
I cut back significantly after they re-uped Valentin and failed to replace the pitching they lost this offseason. If JR plays poor again, I doubt I'll attend more than a couple of home games in 2005, though I'll still try to attend a couple of road series.

OTOH, if they add two good arms and at least one IF who can hit, I'd seriously consider buying a partial season plan and spending a week in Tucson.

Hangar18
09-02-2004, 04:53 PM
They did. As usual, Hanger isn't letting facts get in the way of his arguements.Payroll "raises" for players already on the Roster DO NOT, in fact, equal
RAISING THE PAYROLL. The FACT IS ........ they didnt take on salary
in the offseason, something the Evil Blue Corporation did in the offseason.
They added Greg Maddux. We added Mike Jackson. They added Nomar
Garciaparra. We added Roberto Alomar

Also to add to this .... the one guy that was due the BIGGEST PAYRAISE (because they Foolishly thought delaying payment would help) Magglio Ordonez and his 14Million for 2004, they tried FEVERISHLY to unload in order to CUTPAYROLL. They couldnt and so ......... by Default, the payroll went up.

Dont be Cubuned everyone. and dont be Kiley-ed

Randar68
09-02-2004, 04:56 PM
Right.
We definitely need a "one trick pony" tag in honor of Wealz.

anewman35
09-02-2004, 05:55 PM
Payroll "raises" for players already on the Roster DO NOT, in fact, equal
RAISING THE PAYROLL. The FACT IS ........ they didnt take on salary
in the offseason, something the Evil Blue Corporation did in the offseason.
They added Greg Maddux. We added Mike Jackson. They added Nomar
Garciaparra. We added Roberto Alomar

Also to add to this .... the one guy that was due the BIGGEST PAYRAISE (because they Foolishly thought delaying payment would help) Magglio Ordonez and his 14Million for 2004, they tried FEVERISHLY to unload in order to CUTPAYROLL. They couldnt and so ......... by Default, the payroll went up.

Dont be Cubuned everyone. and dont be Kiley-ed
Sorry, but you're wrong. If they really were so desperate to cut payroll, they'd have placed everybody making money on waivers, just to maybe somebody would take them. Like it or not, "payroll" means "the amount of money paid to players". If they pay more to players, how can you say they are cutting it? Even using your arguement above, the team didn't cut, they stayed the same. Explain to me where and how the team cut payroll between 03 and 04.

ChiWhiteSox1337
09-02-2004, 06:02 PM
probably less depending on if i don't move in the summer of 2005. i've gone to 2 games this year but not because of a boycott or anything. being 16 + little $ to spend on things like baseball games + 3 hour drive to chicago with a person who's unwilling to do so = not good :whiner:

Flight #24
09-02-2004, 06:08 PM
Sorry, but you're wrong. If they really were so desperate to cut payroll, they'd have placed everybody making money on waivers, just to maybe somebody would take them. Like it or not, "payroll" means "the amount of money paid to players". If they pay more to players, how can you say they are cutting it? Even using your arguement above, the team didn't cut, they stayed the same. Explain to me where and how the team cut payroll between 03 and 04.
Not to mention that if they really desperately wanted to trim some of the guys getting raises....they'd have dealt them. Plenty of teams would have taken on Maggs and/or CLee. The problem was that the Sox would only deal them if they got equivalent talent back in return. So they obviously were not making finances the primary consideration in those deals.

kittle42
09-02-2004, 06:25 PM
Sorry, but you're wrong. If they really were so desperate to cut payroll, they'd have placed everybody making money on waivers, just to maybe somebody would take them.
I am sure they did. Most teams put almost everyone on waivers, as has been discussed here before.

anewman35
09-02-2004, 06:31 PM
I am sure they did. Most teams put almost everyone on waivers, as has been discussed here before.
I didn't mean in August. I meant in the offseason, like the Red Sox did with Manny. Nobody took Manny because he had something like $124 million left on his contract, but don't you think somebody with lots of money would have loved to have Maggs if they only had to pay him $14 million for one year and could be rid of him?

If they Sox had truly wanted to be rid of Magglio to save money, they'd have either put him on waivers or traded him for some minor leaguer somewhere. I guarentee you somebody would have done that. The fact that the Sox were attempting to get equal value means it wasn't just a salary dump.

gobears1987
09-02-2004, 06:39 PM
1 problem, Payroll is going to grow by an estimated 15-20 million

pinwheels3530
09-02-2004, 07:17 PM
The way I am feeling right now I won't re new my season tickets, Jr just keeps all the money and puts in his pocket. I don't believe that BS that he's in it for the love of the game if he wasn't making $ over the last twenty years he would have sold the team!!!

nitetrain8601
09-02-2004, 10:44 PM
The way I am feeling right now I won't re new my season tickets, Jr just keeps all the money and puts in his pocket. I don't believe that BS that he's in it for the love of the game if he wasn't making $ over the last twenty years he would have sold the team!!!
What part don't you people understand when it is said that JR is not the complete owner. He's the figurehead. He's the guy you see on tv, you don't see all the other owners on tv, I think that's why you just blame it on him. JR can't make decisions without the other owners. They basically do things with a majority ruling such as expand payroll which they were allowed to do, but Larry Walker and Carlos Delgado wanted no part of the SS. If you're going to blame JR say ownership, because fact is, JR is not calling all the shots. Speak out of your head, not ass please. He does not keep all the money. Again, ownership splits it and they use some of it on payroll. If he were to sell, it wouldn't make a difference if the other hundreds of owners are there. They still have majority say. All you would be doing is eliminating the figurehead. JR wants a championship for the Sox just as much as you guys if not more. He's even stated he would trade in his 6 Bulls championship rings for 1 White Sox World Series Championship.

HomeFish
09-02-2004, 11:09 PM
There is only one number I look at to decide if I want to go to the game or not. And that is the win-loss record, not the payroll.

pinwheels3530
09-02-2004, 11:14 PM
What part don't you people understand when it is said that JR is not the complete owner. He's the figurehead. He's the guy you see on tv, you don't see all the other owners on tv, I think that's why you just blame it on him. JR can't make decisions without the other owners. They basically do things with a majority ruling such as expand payroll which they were allowed to do, but Larry Walker and Carlos Delgado wanted no part of the SS. If you're going to blame JR say ownership, because fact is, JR is not calling all the shots. Speak out of your head, not ass please. He does not keep all the money. Again, ownership splits it and they use some of it on payroll. If he were to sell, it wouldn't make a difference if the other hundreds of owners are there. They still have majority say. All you would be doing is eliminating the figurehead. JR wants a championship for the Sox just as much as you guys if not more. He's even stated he would trade in his 6 Bulls championship rings for 1 White Sox World Series Championship.

OK the ownership keeps the rest of the money that they make everyyear and splits it and JR is their steward as he has stated himself. My point is this organization is making money their smart business people who run a historic franchise in the third largest market in the country, but put a self imposed limit on their payroll to supposedly break even. If you think for one minute that these co-owners and shareholders weren't making money that they would still be in this business, it's common sense!!! They never spend more than they have too they just keep taking player in and out mixing and matching hoping to strike lightning in a bottle, as long as it meets their self imposed payroll and don't lose money:rolleyes:! As a season ticket holder I am frustrated with this nickel and dime stuff, they have made plenty of money over a twenty year period it's time to win already!!! Why don't you get your head our of Jr's ass and see the light!!! :selljerry

soxwon
09-02-2004, 11:28 PM
as stated in another poll. i will attend more games than ever, i went to 30 so far with 5 more left.

I LOVE THIS TEAM.
they are my life, i will love whoever is on the field.
We will be awesome next year, have faith.

thepaulbowski
09-03-2004, 08:43 AM
Payroll "raises" for players already on the Roster DO NOT, in fact, equal
RAISING THE PAYROLL. The FACT IS ........ they didnt take on salary
in the offseason, something the Evil Blue Corporation did in the offseason.
They added Greg Maddux. We added Mike Jackson. They added Nomar
Garciaparra. We added Roberto Alomar

Also to add to this .... the one guy that was due the BIGGEST PAYRAISE (because they Foolishly thought delaying payment would help) Magglio Ordonez and his 14Million for 2004, they tried FEVERISHLY to unload in order to CUTPAYROLL. They couldnt and so ......... by Default, the payroll went up.

Dont be Cubuned everyone. and dont be Kiley-ed
Your argument makes no sense. If payroll goes up, it goes up. If you electricity bill goes up even though you are using the same amount does that mean your expenses haven't gone up? The answer is: NO. It doesn't matter if no players or 100 players were added or if players were added. The amount of money paid on payroll did increase.

If this is you argument, then you question should be "Will you go to more or less games if the Sox do not add more talent?"

voodoochile
09-03-2004, 09:14 AM
Your argument makes no sense. If payroll goes up, it goes up. If you electricity bill goes up even though you are using the same amount does that mean your expenses haven't gone up? The answer is: NO. It doesn't matter if no players or 100 players were added or if players were added. The amount of money paid on payroll did increase.

If this is you argument, then you question should be "Will you go to more or less games if the Sox do not add more talent?"
No, Hangar may not be expressing it very well, but he does make a good point. The Sox did very little to improve the team during the off season so much so that many people expected the team to finish second before the season started.

Payroll increasing is not the same as improving the team. Case in point the Bartolo Colon money went to extend Lee and Buehrle who were both Sox property for the next few years regardless of contract status this past off season. Now obviously, signing Colon would have been a mistake, but they didn't go out and get a different stud pitcher during the off-season to replace Colon, they simply let things ride and it cost the team early in the season.

It will be interesting to see exactly what they do during this off season, but barring a major overhaul, this team is probably headed for second place again, of course with or without the playoffs, the flubbies will sell out before the season starts and that will throw a bunch of money JR's way just like it did this year and he really won't care...

hose
09-03-2004, 09:56 AM
I didn't re-new my 2 , 27 game season tickets this year because I felt the Sox didn't want to spend money to compete. The glaring lack of a 5th starter justifies "my" cut back.

I might go to Tucson for Spring Training next year . My season ticket days are over until this team convinces me that they not only have a solid plan to win it all but they are willing to spend the necessary money to get it done.

Dan H
09-03-2004, 10:16 AM
It is not just how much money you spend, but how you spend it.

We were told in 1997 that the best way to build a team was from the ground up. Develop young players instead of throwing money at free agents was the strategy. In some ways it wasn't a bad idea especially if you are willing reward the young talent once they prove their worth. But if investing in youth was the answer, why couldn't the farm system provide one pitcher to fill the number 5 slot even if that pitcher could just give six decent innings? The Sox didn't just lose those games, they were pounded. Inexcusable.

Since the White Flag Trade, the Sox have won one division title, have three playoff losses and no World Series appearances. They better do something in the offseason. This team is floundering and needs real leadership. Whatever money they spend, they should spend wisely for a change. If they sit on their hands, I don't want to hear lectures about optimism at SoxFest. We have been there and done that.

doublem23
09-03-2004, 11:05 AM
How much the Sox spend will have no affect on how many games I go to next year.

anewman35
09-03-2004, 12:46 PM
Payroll increasing is not the same as improving the team.
I think we'd all agree on that. However, the topic of this thread is "If the SOX Cut Payroll Again this year..." The team didn't get better this year, but the payroll went up. Hanger didn't say "If the SOX don't improve again this year...", so basically this whole poll is pointless, because it's based on a flawed premise (that the Sox cut payroll last year and will again).

voodoochile
09-03-2004, 12:49 PM
I think we'd all agree on that. However, the topic of this thread is "If the SOX Cut Payroll Again this year..." The team didn't get better this year, but the payroll went up. Hanger didn't say "If the SOX don't improve again this year...", so basically this whole poll is pointless, because it's based on a flawed premise (that the Sox cut payroll last year and will again).
The Sox have cut payroll in the past, even if they didn't last year. So, the premise is still valid.

Whether the team improves would be open to interpretation anyway, as that is an opinion that cannot be answered to everyone's agreement.

anewman35
09-03-2004, 03:05 PM
The Sox have cut payroll in the past, even if they didn't last year. So, the premise is still valid.
I'd be willing to bet that's there's not a team in baseball that, at some point, hasn't cut payroll.

Hangar18
09-03-2004, 03:47 PM
I'd be willing to bet that's there's not a team in baseball that, at some point, hasn't cut payroll.



:reinsy "Yeah Hangar, hes right you know! Everyone has cut payroll at some point. Now get off my case Bahhhh haaa haaaa "

balke
09-03-2004, 03:51 PM
SO long as there's players worth watching, I'll be there. $$$ ain't nothin.

Hangar18
09-03-2004, 03:59 PM
.... Once Upon a Time, Uncle Jerry spanked KW and told him to CUT PAYROLL. He did this quietly, but the media and wsi figured them out, as they DIDNT ADD PAYROLL by filling the Holes the team had. Instead, they LET PLAYERS GO WHO WERE DUE RAISES/NEW CONTRACTS foolishly Opening MORE HOLES on the team. The guys who were due the BIGGEST RAISES, the SOX TRIED FEVERISHLY to "trade".

Only, Maggs couldnt get unldd and he stayed here. The Payroll then went up, or was "Raised" purely by Default, to which Uncle Jerry quietly tried to remind us.

A Payroll raised by Default and a Payroll Actively Raised because the team was trying to FILL HOLES and Stay Competitive are 2 very different things.

Uncle Jerry and the SOX tried to play a Shell Game with us, the fans, only were not like the Sheep 8 miles north. We didnt buy it. At least not most of us. So, my question is, if they ACTIVELY TRY TO NOT GET BETTER , will you go to as even MORE games, the SAME amount, or Less games.

I say I WILL GO LESS next year if thats the case ............

steff
09-03-2004, 04:08 PM
They did. As usual, Hanger isn't letting facts get in the way of his arguements.

And why should he... then he wouldn't have anything to complain about. :whiner: :D:

steff
09-03-2004, 04:11 PM
.... Once Upon a Time, Uncle Jerry spanked KW and told him to CUT PAYROLL. He did this quietly, but the media and wsi figured them out, as they DIDNT ADD PAYROLL by filling the Holes the team had. Instead, they LET PLAYERS GO WHO WERE DUE RAISES/NEW CONTRACTS foolishly Opening MORE HOLES on the team. The guys who were due the BIGGEST RAISES, the SOX TRIED FEVERISHLY to "trade".

Only, Maggs couldnt get unldd and he stayed here. The Payroll then went up, or was "Raised" purely by Default, to which Uncle Jerry quietly tried to remind us.

A Payroll raised by Default and a Payroll Actively Raised because the team was trying to FILL HOLES and Stay Competitive are 2 very different things.

Uncle Jerry and the SOX tried to play a Shell Game with us, the fans, only were not like the Sheep 8 miles north. We didnt buy it. At least not most of us. So, my question is, if they ACTIVELY TRY TO NOT GET BETTER , will you go to as even MORE games, the SAME amount, or Less games.

I say I WILL GO LESS next year if thats the case ............


You need help.

gosox41
09-03-2004, 04:16 PM
Timely question, with another playoff-less offseason fast approaching.
I don't think the Sox have cut payroll since right before the 2002 season. No reason to think it will happen next year.


Bob

gosox41
09-03-2004, 04:19 PM
[QUOTE=voodoochile]No, Hangar may not be expressing it very well, but he does make a good point. The Sox did very little to improve the team during the off season so much so that many people expected the team to finish second before the season started.

Payroll increasing is not the same as improving the team. Case in point the Bartolo Colon money went to extend Lee and Buehrle who were both Sox property for the next few years regardless of contract status this past off season. Now obviously, signing Colon would have been a mistake, but they didn't go out and get a different stud pitcher during the off-season to replace Colon, they simply let things ride and it cost the team early in the season.

QUOTE]

On the flip side of Lee and Buehrle is that they were both arbitration eligible. It is possible they could have gotten more money the next couple of years that way which would somehow validate Hangar's weird theory. Also, arbitration can get ugly. You risk alientating a player who will wind up bad mouthing the team.

Signing a player sends a message from the team to the player. It also sends a message to the fans that the team is trying to keep some of its young guys to build around them.


Bob

gosox41
09-03-2004, 04:24 PM
It is not just how much money you spend, but how you spend it.

We were told in 1997 that the best way to build a team was from the ground up. Develop young players instead of throwing money at free agents was the strategy. In some ways it wasn't a bad idea especially if you are willing reward the young talent once they prove their worth. But if investing in youth was the answer, why couldn't the farm system provide one pitcher to fill the number 5 slot even if that pitcher could just give six decent innings? The Sox didn't just lose those games, they were pounded. Inexcusable.

Since the White Flag Trade, the Sox have won one division title, have three playoff losses and no World Series appearances. They better do something in the offseason. This team is floundering and needs real leadership. Whatever money they spend, they should spend wisely for a change. If they sit on their hands, I don't want to hear lectures about optimism at SoxFest. We have been there and done that.
Do what I do. Avoid Soxfest. I didn't go this previous offseason and I can't say that I missed it. I knew the team didn't to enough to improve (and if you read my posts how much I can't stand KW). So rather then go to a weekend long pep rally where fans can cheer the tough talk by KW, listen to Hawks' outlandish predictions, and still overpay for Albert Belle's jersey I sat it out.

Looks like I missed a couple of tough q's and some booing, but nothing that crazy. It still sounded like a typical feel good moment where teams use it to relight that baseball fire under you with that hope springs eternal crap after a long and dark winter.

I missed it and life went on. I refuse to listen to KW or Ozzie or whoever spout off tough talk but not seeing the results on the field.


Bob

duke of dorwood
09-03-2004, 04:34 PM
Maybe some fans need to realize that some of us (and I dont know anyone's ages) have poured lots of $ and lived and died with this team for many years. All we get is told we dont support them. THEN they raise prices this year after a lackluster 2003. No one cares for the Sox more than those of us crying out that something be done other than a rich man using the fans as a reason to build his kid's inheritance.

We all want a team that can go all the way.
Please try & understand this.

steff
09-03-2004, 04:36 PM
Do what I do. Avoid Soxfest. I didn't go this previous offseason and I can't say that I missed it. I knew the team didn't to enough to improve (and if you read my posts how much I can't stand KW). So rather then go to a weekend long pep rally where fans can cheer the tough talk by KW, listen to Hawks' outlandish predictions, and still overpay for Albert Belle's jersey I sat it out.

Looks like I missed a couple of tough q's and some booing, but nothing that crazy. It still sounded like a typical feel good moment where teams use it to relight that baseball fire under you with that hope springs eternal crap after a long and dark winter.

I missed it and life went on. I refuse to listen to KW or Ozzie or whoever spout off tough talk but not seeing the results on the field.


Bob

This past year was no love fest by any means. There were many boos, some finger wagging :redface: , and a lot of calling them out on the BS they were trying to sell us. Didn't do any good.. but it felt good to quiet Kenny for a few minutes.. :D:

Flight #24
09-03-2004, 05:43 PM
.... Once Upon a Time, Uncle Jerry spanked KW and told him to CUT PAYROLL. He did this quietly, but the media and wsi figured them out, as they DIDNT ADD PAYROLL by filling the Holes the team had. Instead, they LET PLAYERS GO WHO WERE DUE RAISES/NEW CONTRACTS foolishly Opening MORE HOLES on the team. The guys who were due the BIGGEST RAISES, the SOX TRIED FEVERISHLY to "trade".

Only, Maggs couldnt get unldd and he stayed here. The Payroll then went up, or was "Raised" purely by Default, to which Uncle Jerry quietly tried to remind us.

A Payroll raised by Default and a Payroll Actively Raised because the team was trying to FILL HOLES and Stay Competitive are 2 very different things.

Uncle Jerry and the SOX tried to play a Shell Game with us, the fans, only were not like the Sheep 8 miles north. We didnt buy it. At least not most of us. So, my question is, if they ACTIVELY TRY TO NOT GET BETTER , will you go to as even MORE games, the SAME amount, or Less games.

I say I WILL GO LESS next year if thats the case ............

Wow. Was JR on the grassy knoll too?:tongue:

Seriously, does anyone really believe that if they wanted to unload Maggs they coulnd't have? They did try to trade him....for a player of equal value in Nomar, one who plays a harder-to-fill position of SS. They also had a rumored deal in place to turn around and deal Valentin for Garcia. So in essence, they were willing to deal Magglio if they could turn a Maggs+Valentin into a Nomar+Garcia. Not exactly a move focused on cutting costs.

If they really wanted to shed Maggs salary, I'm sure they could have traded him to say....the Dodgers for prospects. They didn't, because they only wanted to cut payroll if they coudl do so AND maintain or improve the team.

gosox41
09-03-2004, 05:51 PM
This past year was no love fest by any means. There were many boos, some finger wagging :redface: , and a lot of calling them out on the BS they were trying to sell us. Didn't do any good.. but it felt good to quiet Kenny for a few minutes.. :D:
I remember reading threads about you putting Kenny on the spot. Good job. Too bad more fans weren't asking him the tough questions.


Bob

batmanZoSo
09-03-2004, 05:59 PM
Do what I do. Avoid Soxfest. I didn't go this previous offseason and I can't say that I missed it. I knew the team didn't to enough to improve (and if you read my posts how much I can't stand KW). So rather then go to a weekend long pep rally where fans can cheer the tough talk by KW, listen to Hawks' outlandish predictions, and still overpay for Albert Belle's jersey I sat it out.

Looks like I missed a couple of tough q's and some booing, but nothing that crazy. It still sounded like a typical feel good moment where teams use it to relight that baseball fire under you with that hope springs eternal crap after a long and dark winter.

I missed it and life went on. I refuse to listen to KW or Ozzie or whoever spout off tough talk but not seeing the results on the field.


Bob
I agree totally. KW loves to talk big about winning a World Series and all that but it's just that--talk. The way things are around here, he shouldn't even utter the words World Series. None of them should.

hellenicsoxfan
09-03-2004, 07:18 PM
I need to see a solid plan and commitment to improve before I go to as many games next year (I will go to at least one game just to see the green seats everyone seems to want).

I'm sick and tired of the philosophy of we'll just start with what we have and if we're in contention and attendance increases enough, then we'll make some moves during the season. NO! This is the Major Leagues in the 3rd largest market in the nation with a potential fan base of about 7-8 million. Quit rolling over and letting the northsiders have their way all the time. Go out and show us you know what you're doing. Do something exciting. Force the Chicago media and people to notice the Sox. Put MLB, ESPN and FOX on notice that the Chicago White Sox are back and a force to be dealt with.

Sorry, I guess I started daydreaming there that we have an ownership group that really cares.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-03-2004, 07:46 PM
I need to see a solid plan and commitment to improve before I go to as many games next year (I will go to at least one game just to see the green seats everyone seems to want).

I'm sick and tired of the philosophy of we'll just start with what we have and if we're in contention and attendance increases enough, then we'll make some moves during the season. NO! This is the Major Leagues in the 3rd largest market in the nation with a potential fan base of about 7-8 million. Quit rolling over and letting the northsiders have their way all the time. Go out and show us you know what you're doing. Do something exciting. Force the Chicago media and people to notice the Sox. Put MLB, ESPN and FOX on notice that the Chicago White Sox are back and a force to be dealt with.

Sorry, I guess I started daydreaming there that we have an ownership group that really cares.
You're a good Sox Fan. Be fruitful and multiply.
:cool:

pinwheels3530
09-03-2004, 07:57 PM
I need to see a solid plan and commitment to improve before I go to as many games next year (I will go to at least one game just to see the green seats everyone seems to want).

I'm sick and tired of the philosophy of we'll just start with what we have and if we're in contention and attendance increases enough, then we'll make some moves during the season. NO! This is the Major Leagues in the 3rd largest market in the nation with a potential fan base of about 7-8 million. Quit rolling over and letting the northsiders have their way all the time. Go out and show us you know what you're doing. Do something exciting. Force the Chicago media and people to notice the Sox. Put MLB, ESPN and FOX on notice that the Chicago White Sox are back and a force to be dealt with.

Sorry, I guess I started daydreaming there that we have an ownership group that really cares.




:cheers: :selljerry

Flight #24
09-03-2004, 10:55 PM
I need to see a solid plan and commitment to improve before I go to as many games next year (I will go to at least one game just to see the green seats everyone seems to want).

I'm sick and tired of the philosophy of we'll just start with what we have and if we're in contention and attendance increases enough, then we'll make some moves during the season. NO! This is the Major Leagues in the 3rd largest market in the nation with a potential fan base of about 7-8 million. Quit rolling over and letting the northsiders have their way all the time. Go out and show us you know what you're doing. Do something exciting. Force the Chicago media and people to notice the Sox. Put MLB, ESPN and FOX on notice that the Chicago White Sox are back and a force to be dealt with.

Sorry, I guess I started daydreaming there that we have an ownership group that really cares.
You have every right to do this, but recognize that the chances of this being successful are pretty much slim to none. Given the deal the Sox have on USCF with no rent below a certain attendance level, the team can afford to run pretty lean in terms of attendance. So not going is highly unlikely to induce them to spend. In fact, it's actually more likely to induce cuts in payroll.

hellenicsoxfan
09-04-2004, 01:34 PM
You're a good Sox Fan. Be fruitful and multiply.
:cool:
Thanks. I'll get working on that right away. :smile:

The Critic
09-04-2004, 01:48 PM
In my mind there's still nothing better than a day ( or evening ) at the ballpark, so I'll still go and hope for the best.
FWIW, my record at attended games was VERY good. Only the Josh Stewart start vs. the Red Sawks was a loser for me. I'll take a 6-1 record anytime! :D:

cwsox
09-04-2004, 10:52 PM
Timely question, with another playoff-less offseason fast approaching.

this to me is worrying about something that is utter speculation

if they up the payroll...

if they stay the same...

who knows, why poll on this until something happens?

CallMeNuts
09-06-2004, 01:23 PM
I've been a Sox fan for over 40 years.
I've never seen them in the World Series.
I've been through 1969.
Baseball is by far my favorite sport.
My dad got me to be a Sox fan when I was little.
I now have kids of my own that I've turned into Sox fans.
No matter who the owner is. No matter what the record is.
It's fun to watch a game and root for the Sox, even if they are mathematically eliminated from the race.
Not going to games so as to send a message to the ownership is your right.
Just as cutting off your nose to spite your face is within your rights.
I'll be there for 15 or so games per year. Win or lose. For as long as I can.
And I hope my kids do the same with their kids.

Mohoney
09-06-2004, 04:24 PM
It depends on what they do with the dollars that they do spend. I don't make decisions on whether to go to games based on the payroll. My (and most fans, I believe) enthusiasm depends on how they are playing and how competitive they are.

Now, you may assume that payroll is correlated with team play and competitiveness, but I think that there are other factors that have just as much impact. Teams such as the Twins and A's constantly show us how well a team can play with lower payroll. While some of this is due to luck and factors peculiar to the individual teams, we don't seem to excel in the "smartness" of our organization.
In this crappy division, I believe that you can indeed buy a championship. If our payroll was in the $80 million range, we could have signed a good starting pitcher and went into this season with much better options out of the bullpen than Neal Cotts, Jon Adkins, and Mike Jackson.

batmanZoSo
09-06-2004, 10:16 PM
In this crappy division, I believe that you can indeed buy a championship. If our payroll was in the $80 million range, we could have signed a good starting pitcher and went into this season with much better options out of the bullpen than Neal Cotts, Jon Adkins, and Mike Jackson.
As it stands now, 4 players have 20 homers--Konerko, Lee, Valentin, and Rowand. Uribe has 19, he'll surely hit another by October. Even Crede has 16 somehow...a little hot streak and he'll have 20 as well. We could all agree at least that Crede has 20 home run power. If the Thomas and Maggs injuries didn't happen, we'd have 8 guys with 20 homers. Is that really necessary? Every time we win it's literally by hitting 5 homers, it's ridiculous and you can't do that against good pitching. Result? We're a .500 team.

Even by getting rid of Valentin and letting Maggs go, we're still going to end up close to this year's salary. But what if we trade Konerko, on his way to a 40 home run season, in his prime? That's eight million we really don't need with six other guys who can hit you 20 home runs. I think we could afford to get a big name starter, a reliever or two and a leadoff hitter. I don't care what it takes, we're close to having a great pitching staff and that's all it takes to go for a World Series. We're basically one top starter and a few bullpen guys away. Get rid of any hitter you need to allow you to get that pitching.

jabrch
09-07-2004, 08:12 AM
Payroll "raises" for players already on the Roster DO NOT, in fact, equal
RAISING THE PAYROLL. Yes, IT does. When a TEAM raises the AMOUNT that it spends on PLAYERS, that is RAISING the PAYROLL.


The FACT IS ........ they didnt take on salary in the offseasonNo - THAT is not a FACT. It is DEAD wrong.


They added Greg Maddux. We added Mike Jackson. They added Nomar
Garciaparra. We added Roberto Alomar
The added MIKE DeFelice, WE added Ben Davis. They ADDED ? we added Freddy GARCIA. They have a STADIUM that sells 40,000 tickets a GAME, we dont. They THEY They - WHO CARES? I'm sick of HEARING about them EVERYWHERE I go. I COME here - and the PERSON most outspoken ABOUT the MEDIA overhyping THEM is...OVERHYPING them.

Geesh...Some PEOPLE here have a BAD case of Cub-Envy

Wealz
09-07-2004, 10:53 AM
I need to see a solid plan and commitment to improve before I go to as many games next year (I will go to at least one game just to see the green seats everyone seems to want).
Well said.

It's ownership's perogative to set the payroll, but I'm not going to use that to explain away mediocrity. The question I ask is why can't they win with a mid-$60M payroll when other teams have?

bennyw41
09-07-2004, 10:54 AM
Yes, IT does. When a TEAM raises the AMOUNT that it spends on PLAYERS, that is RAISING the PAYROLL.


No - THAT is not a FACT. It is DEAD wrong.

The added MIKE DeFelice, WE added Ben Davis. They ADDED ? we added Freddy GARCIA. They have a STADIUM that sells 40,000 tickets a GAME, we dont. They THEY They - WHO CARES? I'm sick of HEARING about them EVERYWHERE I go. I COME here - and the PERSON most outspoken ABOUT the MEDIA overhyping THEM is...OVERHYPING them.

Geesh...Some PEOPLE here have a BAD case of Cub-EnvyI agree. but I won't be too emphatic in my agreement, or I'll get warned.

But in all seriousness, Hangar, if you continue to compare us to the cubs, the arguments will never stop. Stop talking about the cubs!!!!

Hangar18
09-07-2004, 11:08 AM
I agree. but I won't be too emphatic in my agreement, or I'll get warned.

But in all seriousness, Hangar, if you continue to compare us to the cubs, the arguments will never stop. Stop talking about the cubs!!!!
guys cmon now ....... I use the Evil Blue Corporation as a yardstick because
they too are supposedly a baseball team, and they share the same city as we do. How one team can spend and the other not is beyond me. As long
as were in the same city as "them", there will always be comparisons, whether we like it or not. Doesnt it always feel good when we beat them a majority of the time?

jabrch
09-07-2004, 11:14 AM
I use the Evil Blue Corporation as a yardstick because
they too are supposedly a baseball team, and they share the same city as we do. How one team can spend and the other not is beyond me.
Bear Country Pizza and Pizza Hut are both fast food Pizza manufacturers. While I am sure BCP is FAR SUPERIOR, and anyone who knows a damn thing about Za would know that, they spend differently. On a per capita basis, I am sure that Pizza Hut spends far more than BCP. Why is that?

The answer to that question, is the same as the answer to "How one team can spend and the other not is beyond me." REVENUE MODELS The Cubs and the Tribune and its Cub Related properties rake is significantly more than the Sox ownership does from the team. Greater operating revenue logically leads to greater expenditures. That really isn't "beyond" you, is it?

Hangar18
09-07-2004, 11:26 AM
Bear Country Pizza and Pizza Hut are both fast food Pizza manufacturers. While I am sure BCP is FAR SUPERIOR, and anyone who knows a damn thing about Za would know that, they spend differently. On a per capita basis, I am sure that Pizza Hut spends far more than BCP. Why is that?

The answer to that question, is the same as the answer to "How one team can spend and the other not is beyond me." REVENUE MODELS The Cubs and the Tribune and its Cub Related properties rake is significantly more than the Sox ownership does from the team. Greater operating revenue logically leads to greater expenditures. That really isn't "beyond" you, is it?

Ok ....... your leading us down the "baseball needs equal revenue sharing" plans
right? I agree also .....they chose to ignore this when the last strike was about to happen. BUT, were not Kansas City, were also located in Chicago. Comparing a single Pizza Store to a CHain doesnt make sense,
because the SOX were one of the 1st "Pizza" houses around. We are in fact owned by a corporation too .......... its just that our owner continues to martyr his own team for the sake of Not Spending. Not spending in key years where, all we need are just a couple of key players to WIN. We instead try to dump players before their next year salary INcreases (thereby prompting some of us here to say "hey, they raised their payroll after all! If im not mistaken, wasnt Nomar making 11 million this season, and Maggs $14million?) Lets not dilute this argument with bad comparisons. WERE a Major Market Team ......... AND WERE NOT BEHAVING LIKE ONE

gosox41
09-07-2004, 11:44 AM
guys cmon now ....... I use the Evil Blue Corporation as a yardstick because
they too are supposedly a baseball team, and they share the same city as we do. How one team can spend and the other not is beyond me. As long
as were in the same city as "them", there will always be comparisons, whether we like it or not. Doesnt it always feel good when we beat them a majority of the time?
One of the teams draws 38,000+ per game and could do that with higher ticket prices and no half price nights, kid days, or marketing ideas.


The fact is if the Sox drew that much even with lower ticket prices, this team would have a much higher payroll.

There is a direct correlation between payroll and attendence for the Sox. As attendence increases so does payroll. It may not be fair, but then again fans can go to more games. The Sox afterall are drawing from the same population as the Cubs. The fact is the Sox draw less for different reasons. But it's not just the die hard fan that was put off by 1994 and is still crying about it 10 years later, it's also about getting the casual fans to the ballpark.

The Cubs do this well. The Sox don't, though that may be changing.

But this argument is going in circles. First, the Sox haven't even come out with their payroll next season but all indications seem to think it will be higher. Second, if the SOx did a better job marketing itself then they wouldn't be in this position. As the media expert, Hangar, you know that it helps to market yourself if you own the biggest newspaper in the city as well as a Superstation that is viewed across the nation.


Bob

Wealz
09-07-2004, 11:45 AM
all we need are just a couple of key players to WIN.
Names?

gosox41
09-07-2004, 11:47 AM
Names?
Aparicio, Fox, Hoyt, Thigpen...:D:


Bob

jabrch
09-07-2004, 11:49 AM
Ok ....... your leading us down the "baseball needs equal revenue sharing" plans
right? I agree also .....they chose to ignore this when the last strike was about to happen. BUT, were not Kansas City, were also located in Chicago. Comparing a single Pizza Store to a CHain doesnt make sense,
because the SOX were one of the 1st "Pizza" houses around. We are in fact owned by a corporation too .......... its just that our owner continues to martyr his own team for the sake of Not Spending. Not spending in key years where, all we need are just a couple of key players to WIN. We instead try to dump players before their next year salary INcreases (thereby prompting some of us here to say "hey, they raised their payroll after all! If im not mistaken, wasnt Nomar making 11 million this season, and Maggs $14million?) Lets not dilute this argument with bad comparisons. WERE a Major Market Team ......... AND WERE NOT BEHAVING LIKE ONE
Hangar - are you trying to say our revenue is close to the Cubs? Are you trying to say we should be able to spend like them? I don't give a rats a$$ about revenue sharing. It's all a bunch of crap where they play BS accounting games to minimize how much the top 5 teams in terms of revenue dish out. This team has invested money in FAs. You don't mention it, but we spent big $ on Belle, we made good offers to Colon and to Magglio. We have kept Thomas. We made legit offers to many players. Sheet - we had a team this year that was built to win - if not decimated by injuries. I don't blame ownership for not wanting to lose money. I wouldn't - if I were them.

Now I agree - they are shortsighted. If you spend the money, there is a greater likelihood of building a team that could win, and bringing fans into the gates. But we don't have that luxury that the Cubs have. They have had 3mm for how long? They have how many other revenue sources that we don't have? It's not an apples to apples comparison any more than comparing Vodoo's pizza place to Pizza Hut and you know it.

And your arguement that "We are in fact owned by a corporation too" is even weaker. What our corporate strucure is was not the issue. The issue is the REVENUE STREAMS of that corporation. The Sox ownership committee, however they are structured, have no other revenue stream. (that's not to say that those millionaires live off the Sox - they don't - but that's not the point either)

voodoochile
09-07-2004, 11:51 AM
One of the teams draws 38,000+ per game and could do that with higher ticket prices and no half price nights, kid days, or marketing ideas.


The fact is if the Sox drew that much even with lower ticket prices, this team would have a much higher payroll.

There is a direct correlation between payroll and attendence for the Sox. As attendence increases so does payroll. It may not be fair, but then again fans can go to more games. The Sox afterall are drawing from the same population as the Cubs. The fact is the Sox draw less for different reasons. But it's not just the die hard fan that was put off by 1994 and is still crying about it 10 years later, it's also about getting the casual fans to the ballpark.

The Cubs do this well. The Sox don't, though that may be changing.

But this argument is going in circles. First, the Sox haven't even come out with their payroll next season but all indications seem to think it will be higher. Second, if the SOx did a better job marketing itself then they wouldn't be in this position. As the media expert, Hangar, you know that it helps to market yourself if you own the biggest newspaper in the city as well as a Superstation that is viewed across the nation.


Bob
Okay, let's turn that around a bit...

Higher payroll = more wins = more playoff appearances = more recognition = more attendance = higher media contract revenue = more money = even higher payroll = even more wins = etc. etc. etc.

Until JR proves he wants to win every year as much as he pays lip service to the concept, the fans will continue to be skeptical. He got his wish this season. His improved ballpark along with some early season success combined with the fact that almost no other baseball tickets were available within the city limits drove attendance very well.

Now it is on him to prove he will actually continue to improve the team by allowing a higher payroll. They are dumping some high salaries this season and have made more money. Time for JR to put his money where his and the other investor's mouths are.

I, for one, am very skeptical he will actually do it. Or, he will do it on the cheap - signing recognizable names that are past their prime in an attempt (for the 25th straight season) to win one on the sly.

:selljerry

Wealz
09-07-2004, 12:28 PM
WERE a Major Market Team ......... AND WERE NOT BEHAVING LIKE ONE
I'd like for us to "behave" like the Twins.

gosox41
09-07-2004, 01:10 PM
Okay, let's turn that around a bit...

Higher payroll = more wins = more playoff appearances = more recognition = more attendance = higher media contract revenue = more money = even higher payroll = even more wins = etc. etc. etc.

Until JR proves he wants to win every year as much as he pays lip service to the concept, the fans will continue to be skeptical. He got his wish this season. His improved ballpark along with some early season success combined with the fact that almost no other baseball tickets were available within the city limits drove attendance very well.

Now it is on him to prove he will actually continue to improve the team by allowing a higher payroll. They are dumping some high salaries this season and have made more money. Time for JR to put his money where his and the other investor's mouths are.

I, for one, am very skeptical he will actually do it. Or, he will do it on the cheap - signing recognizable names that are past their prime in an attempt (for the 25th straight season) to win one on the sly.

:selljerry


I think there are 2 seperate issues here:

1. Will the team raise payroll? A raise in payroll means he is paying out more money in salary to players then he was last season. As long as he does that it is a raise in payroll. Doesn't matter if he signs Joe Schmo to a 1 year $75 mill. contract to play for the 2005 Sox, the Sox payroll is automatically higher. And this leads to the second point:

2. The make up of the team. It's one thing to raise payroll, but most of us know (at least those of us that think Beane is better then KW) that money doesn't guarantee a championship let alone the playoffs. It's about how the Sox allocate money. The example above of signing Joe Shchmo to a big contract is a stupid idea. As is overpaying for washed up players.

But that's KW's job. His job is to get the personnel vie drafts, free agency, or trades. He is given a number to work with and he needs to build this team within that number. As long as that number is higher then 2004 then I don't see an issue with payroll.

But as long as KW is GM, I will see have an issue because the guy in charge of player personnel has done a lousy job since he has been here.


Bob

pinwheels3530
09-07-2004, 01:11 PM
Okay, let's turn that around a bit...

Higher payroll = more wins = more playoff appearances = more recognition = more attendance = higher media contract revenue = more money = even higher payroll = even more wins = etc. etc. etc.

Until JR proves he wants to win every year as much as he pays lip service to the concept, the fans will continue to be skeptical. He got his wish this season. His improved ballpark along with some early season success combined with the fact that almost no other baseball tickets were available within the city limits drove attendance very well.

Now it is on him to prove he will actually continue to improve the team by allowing a higher payroll. They are dumping some high salaries this season and have made more money. Time for JR to put his money where his and the other investor's mouths are.

I, for one, am very skeptical he will actually do it. Or, he will do it on the cheap - signing recognizable names that are past their prime in an attempt (for the 25th straight season) to win one on the sly.

:selljerry



Yep like Omar Visquel (37yrs old)???????

Flight #24
09-07-2004, 01:55 PM
Yep like Omar Visquel (37yrs old)???????
It all depends. Omar Vizquel @ 3mil on a 1 or 2 year deal is awesome given the alternate options at SS, especially is it's in conjunction with signing a better pitcher.

Omar Vizquel at 5 or 6 mil is a bad deal.

Would you rather have Vizquel and Odalis Perez? Or Renteria? I'd take the former.

voodoochile
09-07-2004, 10:42 PM
I think there are 2 seperate issues here:

1. Will the team raise payroll? A raise in payroll means he is paying out more money in salary to players then he was last season. As long as he does that it is a raise in payroll. Doesn't matter if he signs Joe Schmo to a 1 year $75 mill. contract to play for the 2005 Sox, the Sox payroll is automatically higher. And this leads to the second point:

2. The make up of the team. It's one thing to raise payroll, but most of us know (at least those of us that think Beane is better then KW) that money doesn't guarantee a championship let alone the playoffs. It's about how the Sox allocate money. The example above of signing Joe Shchmo to a big contract is a stupid idea. As is overpaying for washed up players.

But that's KW's job. His job is to get the personnel vie drafts, free agency, or trades. He is given a number to work with and he needs to build this team within that number. As long as that number is higher then 2004 then I don't see an issue with payroll.

But as long as KW is GM, I will see have an issue because the guy in charge of player personnel has done a lousy job since he has been here.


BobAnd the reason KW has a job is because JR wanted someone inexpensive and pliable. Ultimately the fact that KW has a job comes back to JR. Now I don't dislike KW as much as you do, in fact given the state of the team I am WAY happier he is the GM then the other options out there that JR would have considered, but either way, the buck has to finally stop on JR's desk.

How can you blame the guy who you hate for doing the job he has been hired to do to the best of his ability and knowledge and not blame the guy who gave him that job?

It's pretty well documented that more money = more wins over the long haul, so anything else is just plain cheap and continues to ignore the fact that the team is well in the black profit wise if you count the increase in capital. Now I realize it hasn't been cashed in yet, but does anyone actually believe this is as risky an investment as penny stocks? How about Microsoft? US Govt. Bonds? Me? I take the baseball team every time. JR and his fellow investors are in for a HUGE windfall the minute they sell the team. It's just that simple and with the redone stadium, a more owner friendly CBA (and getting even better in 2006 probably) and a team that will be almost stripped of long term contracts after next season (Garcia remains the only member of the team signed into 2007), this team is ripe for the selling. Of course JR really really really really really really wants to win a WS... and their's this great bridge overlooking the Chicago river that I just happen to own the rights to. Care to make a bid?:?:

gosox41
09-08-2004, 10:11 AM
And the reason KW has a job is because JR wanted someone inexpensive and pliable. Ultimately the fact that KW has a job comes back to JR. Now I don't dislike KW as much as you do, in fact given the state of the team I am WAY happier he is the GM then the other options out there that JR would have considered, but either way, the buck has to finally stop on JR's desk.

How can you blame the guy who you hate for doing the job he has been hired to do to the best of his ability and knowledge and not blame the guy who gave him that job?

It's pretty well documented that more money = more wins over the long haul, so anything else is just plain cheap and continues to ignore the fact that the team is well in the black profit wise if you count the increase in capital. Now I realize it hasn't been cashed in yet, but does anyone actually believe this is as risky an investment as penny stocks? How about Microsoft? US Govt. Bonds? Me? I take the baseball team every time. JR and his fellow investors are in for a HUGE windfall the minute they sell the team. It's just that simple and with the redone stadium, a more owner friendly CBA (and getting even better in 2006 probably) and a team that will be almost stripped of long term contracts after next season (Garcia remains the only member of the team signed into 2007), this team is ripe for the selling. Of course JR really really really really really really wants to win a WS... and their's this great bridge overlooking the Chicago river that I just happen to own the rights to. Care to make a bid?:?:
On the flipside, KW knew what he was getting into when he got the job. And doing any job to the best of your abilities is great...when you're in kindergarted. I don't want excuses and there is no reward for effortso KW tends to be SOL in my book.

Now as for money. Money helps, don't get me wrong. Money makes it a lot easier to cover up a teams holes/misktakes. And the Sox may have more wins if they had more money.

But what needsto be kept in mind is that KW has singed a lot of these players and is the reason the Sox were in this predicament of having no money to spend going into 2004. WHo locked up PK or negotiate the deal to give Magglio $14 mill. in the final year of his contract? KW.

Also, and I've said it before. MLB has an unbalanced schedule. The Sox have been in the weakest division in MLB the last 4 years. There are also some cheap payrolls in their as the Sox have outspend everyone in their division the last 4 years. And they still can't build a winner. Money is the easy excuse of why you're not winning. But it's lame as long as teams like Oakland can make the playoffs 4 (and maybe 5 years in a row) or the Marlins can win a championship with a payroll equivalent to the Sox or the Angels can do the same with a middle of the road payroll.

It can be done. It has been done and it will continue to be done by teams with good GM's. Sure it requires creativity or extra effort but that's the role of a good GM. Not to handicap the team with dead weight and shortsighted contracts.

If I remember correctly, going into the season the Sox had the 12th highest payroll in baseball. They have since added to it. Because of injuries we'll never knwo if this team would have gotten hot in July/Aug/Sep or pull a choke jobn again. But I expect the payroll to go up again next year. Let's say it cracks the top 10 in MLB, would that get everyone to stop blaming money?

One thing I notice here, is that no matter how much JR spends it'll never be enough. If he goes with a $75 mill. payroll people will complain it's not $80. It'll keep going on and on like this. Yet some of these people don't attend many Sox games for whatever reason to give them the support they need. If the Sox had the attendance like the Cubs they would probably spend more then the Cubs.


Bob

voodoochile
09-08-2004, 10:24 AM
On the flipside, KW knew what he was getting into when he got the job. And doing any job to the best of your abilities is great...when you're in kindergarted. I don't want excuses and there is no reward for effortso KW tends to be SOL in my book.

Now as for money. Money helps, don't get me wrong. Money makes it a lot easier to cover up a teams holes/misktakes. And the Sox may have more wins if they had more money.

But what needsto be kept in mind is that KW has singed a lot of these players and is the reason the Sox were in this predicament of having no money to spend going into 2004. WHo locked up PK or negotiate the deal to give Magglio $14 mill. in the final year of his contract? KW.

Also, and I've said it before. MLB has an unbalanced schedule. The Sox have been in the weakest division in MLB the last 4 years. There are also some cheap payrolls in their as the Sox have outspend everyone in their division the last 4 years. And they still can't build a winner. Money is the easy excuse of why you're not winning. But it's lame as long as teams like Oakland can make the playoffs 4 (and maybe 5 years in a row) or the Marlins can win a championship with a payroll equivalent to the Sox or the Angels can do the same with a middle of the road payroll.

It can be done. It has been done and it will continue to be done by teams with good GM's. Sure it requires creativity or extra effort but that's the role of a good GM. Not to handicap the team with dead weight and shortsighted contracts.

If I remember correctly, going into the season the Sox had the 12th highest payroll in baseball. They have since added to it. Because of injuries we'll never knwo if this team would have gotten hot in July/Aug/Sep or pull a choke jobn again. But I expect the payroll to go up again next year. Let's say it cracks the top 10 in MLB, would that get everyone to stop blaming money?

One thing I notice here, is that no matter how much JR spends it'll never be enough. If he goes with a $75 mill. payroll people will complain it's not $80. It'll keep going on and on like this. Yet some of these people don't attend many Sox games for whatever reason to give them the support they need. If the Sox had the attendance like the Cubs they would probably spend more then the Cubs.


Bob
Again, you blame a guy who is doing a job but refuse to blame the guy who handed him that job. By your own standards, KW is a "kindergardner" among giants in the field. Yet, you hold nothing against JR for hiring him and keeping him around.

Money has been proven to increase wins. I wrote an article detailing that exact point for this website.

Well I agree that it is more important to spend the money that you have wisely, the Sox simply don't spend enough for a team with this much potential customer base. This isn't something that has been true just recently over the course of JR's tenure, the Sox have consistently underspent their competition over the course of JR's ownership group.

You keep wishing for a miracle. You are exactly the type of fan JR loves to see coming.

Tell you what. Give me one season of $75M with no obvious holes to open the season and see how the fans respond. Don't count on a AAA pitcher with little to no experience being the starter. Don't count on a rookie with great potential in RF. Don't count on the retread catchers having a breakout season. Don't count on your light hitting 2B to be the answer at leadoff hitter.

Build a solid team that has little obvious problems then add to it during the season.

The next time that happens will be the first in the last decade plus.

:selljerry

Flight #24
09-08-2004, 11:52 AM
Tell you what. Give me one season of $75M with no obvious holes to open the season and see how the fans respond. Don't count on a AAA pitcher with little to no experience being the starter. Don't count on a rookie with great potential in RF. Don't count on the retread catchers having a breakout season. Don't count on your light hitting 2B to be the answer at leadoff hitter.


I don't think there are ANY teams that can say that, regardless of payroll. Even the Spankees had some obvious holes opening the season: Counting on Jon Lieber as your 5th starter, having Miguel Cairo as your starting 2B. The Red Sox had obvious holes at the bottom of their rotation. Everyone relies on rookies or journeymen at some spots in the order and usually at the bottom of the rotation as well.

It's all about having enough in your strengths to cover for your holes/weaknesses. A great offseason for the Sox would be to sign a good starter and a reliever or 2. But that would still leave you with Uribe/Harris/Crede as 3/4 of your starting infield and Davis/Burke as your catchers. However, I think they can cover for those holes with the return of Frank and the upgrade in the pitching staff.

gosox41
09-08-2004, 01:22 PM
Again, you blame a guy who is doing a job but refuse to blame the guy who handed him that job. By your own standards, KW is a "kindergardner" among giants in the field. Yet, you hold nothing against JR for hiring him and keeping him around.

Money has been proven to increase wins. I wrote an article detailing that exact point for this website.

Well I agree that it is more important to spend the money that you have wisely, the Sox simply don't spend enough for a team with this much potential customer base. This isn't something that has been true just recently over the course of JR's tenure, the Sox have consistently underspent their competition over the course of JR's ownership group.

You keep wishing for a miracle. You are exactly the type of fan JR loves to see coming.

Tell you what. Give me one season of $75M with no obvious holes to open the season and see how the fans respond. Don't count on a AAA pitcher with little to no experience being the starter. Don't count on a rookie with great potential in RF. Don't count on the retread catchers having a breakout season. Don't count on your light hitting 2B to be the answer at leadoff hitter.

Build a solid team that has little obvious problems then add to it during the season.

The next time that happens will be the first in the last decade plus.

:selljerry
I blame KW for doing a lousy job based on what he has to work with. I also blame JR for hiring such a fool and for sticking with him for so long.

Money is spent based on attendance. It's a reality. It's unfortunate that JR won't take out any debt to up the payroll. But I still feel that this team should have won their division the last few years. The fact that that this team outspends others in the AL Central and still can't even beat them says something about the team they out together as well as digs a small hole in your theory that money=wins.

Let's say KW wasn't a fool and never traded Foulke. Last season, I'm willing to bet this team makes the playoffs. I'd also bet this season that this teams payroll would be higher then it is right now and attendance would be higher.

This year the team has seen a spike in attendance early on. I'm convinced payroll is going up next year. I bet the SOx have the highest payroll in their division againnext season. So that means they should win it, right? I mean 76 games against teams with lower payrolls right in their own backyard. They should walkaway with the division right?

Now it's nice to talk about the Yankees and Red Sox and even the Cubs and see what $100 mill can do for you (though the Cubs haven't won anything yet and hopefully they never do). But the reality is the last few years, financially the AL Central has been very winnable. And they still haven't done it. Kenny should forget the World Series right now and just see if he can make the damn playoffs.

If the Sox made the playoffs the last few years and got blown out to the Yankees or Red Sox I can see your point about money. Money is important, but it's not the single greatest factor that makes a team a winner. But the fact is that KW needs to put a little more elbow grease into building a Sox team. He doesn't have the advantages of NY, then again he's got more resources then Minnesota. It may take some creativity and extra effort but there is little excuse for this team to have zero division titles since 2001.


Bob