PDA

View Full Version : Boras Disputes Poor Relationship With White Sox


Wealz
10-15-2004, 05:21 PM
Says he always returns Reinsdorf's calls and he's talked to Williams recently about players he represents. Additionally, he represents three Sox, Crede Uribe, and Schoenweiss

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sox.asp?intID=38275182

Randar68
10-15-2004, 05:23 PM
Additionally, he represents three Sox, Crede Uribe, and Schoenweiss
Wow, not sure I'd admit that if I were Scott, LOL!

nodiggity59
10-15-2004, 05:24 PM
This will make it more disappointing when we don't get Beltran, b/c now we don't have the "Sox can't sign a Boras client" excuse.

Wealz
10-15-2004, 05:30 PM
Wow, not sure I'd admit that if I were Scott, LOL!
Yeah. I'd love to see his 70-page 'A-Rod' booklet that presents Scott Schoenweiss. Lots of pictures and triple-spaced I'm guessing.

DrCrawdad
10-15-2004, 05:43 PM
Says he always returns Reinsdorf's calls and he's talked to Williams recently about players he represents. Additionally, he represents three Sox, Crede Uribe, and Schoenweiss

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sox.asp?intID=38275182

"A lot of the players I represent love playing in Chicago,'' Boras said. "It's a great city and it's got a lot to offer. I don't give any teams priority over others when it comes to placing my clients. I work with all teams equally, and the White Sox are no different.''

No doubt the comments by Borass are largely COVER YOUR ASSETS but at least he's stating publicly that he has dealings with the Sox. It can't hurt the Sox and it certainly doesn't hurt Borass.

Ol' No. 2
10-15-2004, 05:53 PM
Did anyone expect him to say publicly "Jerry Reinsdorf is a cheapskate, and I won't deal with him"??

steff
10-15-2004, 05:55 PM
Did anyone expect him to say publicly "Jerry Reinsdorf is a cheapskate, and I won't deal with him"??


Or more accurately...

"I'm a bastard who will suck the last ounce of blood from a 3 day dead rat to up my commissions!!!"

Lip Man 1
10-15-2004, 06:27 PM
Very interesting...but it still comes down to Scott's bottom line. Money and perks. We'll see if the Sox step up and meet it.

Lip

Soxzilla
10-15-2004, 06:47 PM
I hope, by talking to KW. They are working on a deal to get beltran over to the sox.:smile:


:KW
"AHAHAHAHAHAHAH, if by 'getting beltran' you mean...resigning schoeweneiss....AHAHAHAHAH"
:(:

DrCrawdad
10-15-2004, 07:53 PM
Did anyone expect him to say publicly "Jerry Reinsdorf is a cheapskate, and I won't deal with him"??

No, clearly it would be against his interests to make such a statement. But Borass doesn't have to go out of his way to point out his dealings with the White Sox and Reinsdorf.

Borass wants at least the perception to be that he has decent relations with all the owners.

As a Sox fan I'm glad to hear that Borass is claiming to have contact with the Sox and at least publicly open to future dealings.

DrCrawdad
10-15-2004, 07:56 PM
I hope, by talking to KW. They are working on a deal to get beltran over to the sox.:smile:


:KW
"AHAHAHAHAHAHAH, if by 'getting beltran' you mean...resigning schoeweneiss....AHAHAHAHAH"
:(:

Well they are not allowed to talk about Beltran while he's an Astro. That would be tampering.

Soxzilla
10-15-2004, 08:39 PM
Well they are not allowed to talk about Beltran while he's an Astro. That would be tampering.
Didn't stop the mets from talking about magglio.

Brian26
10-15-2004, 08:46 PM
Didn't stop the mets from talking about magglio.
Or the Cardinals and Buehrle.

RichFitztightly
10-15-2004, 09:03 PM
Didn't stop the mets from talking about magglio.
Or the Cubs' fellow employees (*ahem* Cubune Reporters *ahem*) from talking about Beltran.

gosox41
10-16-2004, 11:04 AM
Very interesting...but it still comes down to Scott's bottom line. Money and perks. We'll see if the Sox step up and meet it.

Lip
Lip,
Just out of curiousity, how much to you think Beltran is worth? I mean years, and total $$$$.


Bob

JKryl
10-16-2004, 01:30 PM
Or more accurately...

"I'm a bastard who will suck the last ounce of blood from a 3 day dead rat to up my commissions!!!"
Sounds like you've negotiated with him yourself!:wink:

LuvSox
10-16-2004, 01:31 PM
The Sun-Times article makes a good point about medical privacy and a possible violation of HIPAA laws when KW opened his word hole about Maggs knee.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sports/cst-spt-maggs16.html

Lip Man 1
10-16-2004, 01:52 PM
I found this comment from the story particularly interesting:

"Boras admitted he hasn't spoken to Reinsdorf since discussions regarding Alex Rodriguez broke down in 2000."

Geez...I wonder why?

Lip

Ol' No. 2
10-16-2004, 02:05 PM
As much as people like to rag on Boras, he's doing what his clients are paying him to do: get them the best possible contract. Does that drive up salaries? Sure, but it's not his job to try to keep salaries down. His job is to represent his clients. FWIW, I thought his getting the Rangers to bid against themselves was deceitful and unethical, but otherwise, I have no problem with him using any ethical method at his disposal in doing what he's getting paid to do. It's in his client's interest to have as many teams bidding for their services as possible, so of course Boras will talk to any team that's interested - White Sox included.

At the same time, the best deal is not necessarily the most $$$. If Alex Rodrieguez could do it over again, do you think he might choose to sign for less money somewhere other than the Rangers? And that lesson is not lost on other players. I don't think Beltran or Ordonez will automatically sign with whoever offers the most money.

Lip Man 1
10-16-2004, 02:11 PM
No.2:

You're right, from what I've found personally from speaking to players over the years money is not necessarily the most important deciding factor. But also don't minimize it either!

The other factor that I've found is a sincere desire to win a World Series and get that ring.

You do have to admit there are a number of other teams out there that seem to have a better chance to do that then the Sox.

Lip

fquaye149
10-16-2004, 02:13 PM
Or more accurately...

"I'm a bastard who will suck the last ounce of blood from a 3 day dead rat to up my commissions!!!"


this is why i appreciate your posts steff:

a breath of fresh air from all the people who will find a way to blame JR if it rains tomorrow.

Ol' No. 2
10-16-2004, 02:47 PM
No.2:

You're right, from what I've found personally from speaking to players over the years money is not necessarily the most important deciding factor. But also don't minimize it either!

The other factor that I've found is a sincere desire to win a World Series and get that ring.

You do have to admit there are a number of other teams out there that seem to have a better chance to do that then the Sox.

LipAbsolutely agree, Lip. And Reinsdorf's reputation (whether deserved or not) doesn't help. But there are about 8 or 9 good FA pitchers out there, and the Yankers aren't going to sign all of them. It shouldn't be that hard for the Sox to come up with a good one, and at a not-unreasonable price. Beltran is more in the one-of-a-kind category, which works against the Sox.

It's also funny how fast perceptions can change. What do you think was the players' perception of the Cubs a couple of years ago? I doubt many thought of them as a winning organization. A good year and a couple of good moves and perceptions can change a lot. And it's not just payroll. I'm pretty sure the 2001 Sox were thought of as winners before the epidemic hit. And I also think players regard teams with solid pitching staffs as more likely to be winners, which is another reason I'd prefer to beef up the pitching first.

Lip Man 1
10-16-2004, 10:39 PM
This and That:

Bob...I have no idea... as you have often pointed out I'm not a businessman and have no idea what the market is. I think it will be much higher then the Sox (based on their history) are willing to pay.

No. 2... The Cubs perception has always been favorable even when losing because of the 'perception' about the shrine that they play in, day games (always a very big inducement to single players because they can go out at night and family guys because they can be home with the kids at night) and the fact that the Cubs have always paid pretty well. Just go back over the years and see how they have always been fairly active in the off season. I can go back to the 80's wondering how in the hell they were able to get pretty good players like Spier, Trillo, Buechele, Matthews, Bowa, Dernier etc. to play for them.

I think because of a number of factors that can't be found anyplace else they are the exception to the rule. And also you have to account for the fact that many of the players the Cubs got had already won a ring with somebody else.

Lip

steff
10-16-2004, 10:46 PM
this is why i appreciate your posts steff:

a breath of fresh air from all the people who will find a way to blame JR if it rains tomorrow.
It's a tough job... but someone's gotta do it.. :wink:

steff
10-16-2004, 10:47 PM
Sounds like you've negotiated with him yourself!:wink:

I've never met him personally, but I've heard some nasty, nasty stuff about him. The ARod stuff is child's play compared to the arse he really is. IMO..

DaveIsHere
10-16-2004, 11:42 PM
Lip,
Just out of curiousity, how much to you think Beltran is worth? I mean years, and total $$$$.


Bob 168Mil over 3 years. He's hit 6 HR's in the playoffs

Flight #24
10-17-2004, 12:01 AM
I found this comment from the story particularly interesting:

"Boras admitted he hasn't spoken to Reinsdorf since discussions regarding Alex Rodriguez broke down in 2000."

Geez...I wonder why?

LipHow about one big reason being that owners only get involved with superstar players, and the Sox haven't been involved in negotiations on any of Bora$$ superstar guys since then. (I'm not even sure which of his superstar players have been on the market since then, but the Sox would only have considered any that were pitchers.)

A better question would have been: "How often have you dealt with KW on your FAs?". But that would take actual journalism trying to make an honest, accurate portrayal rather than a cheap & easy but potentially inaccurate implication.

flo-B-flo
10-17-2004, 02:10 AM
Or more accurately...

"I'm a bastard who will suck the last ounce of blood from a 3 day dead rat to up my commissions!!!" LO MF L!! Only a TRUE Sox fan kills like this!! After all the obvious acrimony between Riensy and Borass, why the almost kind words? Is Borass reaching out? Interesting.

Ol' No. 2
10-17-2004, 03:35 AM
This and That:
No. 2... The Cubs perception has always been favorable even when losing because of the 'perception' about the shrine that they play in, day games (always a very big inducement to single players because they can go out at night and family guys because they can be home with the kids at night) and the fact that the Cubs have always paid pretty well. Just go back over the years and see how they have always been fairly active in the off season. I can go back to the 80's wondering how in the hell they were able to get pretty good players like Spier, Trillo, Buechele, Matthews, Bowa, Dernier etc. to play for them.

I think because of a number of factors that can't be found anyplace else they are the exception to the rule. And also you have to account for the fact that many of the players the Cubs got had already won a ring with somebody else.

LipDespite what they might say, I doubt most players really care about playing at the shrine. And many hate it because of the dilapidated locker rooms and no amenities. And if players like day games, how come all I hear from Cubs players is carping about having to play day games? They've gotten some decent FA players, but when's the last time they snagged a primo FA? Mostly it's guys like Alou and Maddox, who, though still good, are in the later stages of their careers.

MisterB
10-17-2004, 04:59 AM
They've gotten some decent FA players, but when's the last time they snagged a primo FA? Mostly it's guys like Alou and Maddox, who, though still good, are in the later stages of their careers.
For example:

I can go back to the 80's wondering how in the hell they were able to get pretty good players like Spier, Trillo, Buechele, Matthews, Bowa, Dernier etc. to play for them.
All those players, with the exception of Dernier, were past their prime by the time the Cubs got them (Trillo was actually with with the Cubs before his prime as well). And they were all basically good field/low-offense types (with the possible exception of Buechele).

gosox41
10-17-2004, 09:51 AM
This and That:

Bob...I have no idea... as you have often pointed out I'm not a businessman and have no idea what the market is. I think it will be much higher then the Sox (based on their history) are willing to pay.

Lip
I was just hoping you'd take a stance and give an opinion. Just what do you think Magglio is worth to the team? I know it's whatever the market bears, and I don't know the insides of the market any more then you do. I just wanted to see you put a number on it, in your best estimation going by what you know. For example, is a 100% healthy Magglio worth more or less then Vlad? How about versus Beltran? Is JR/KW wrong for wanting to examine Magglio's knee before they start serious negotiations? Are KW/JR just doing it to so they can dress up as a doctor and talk to Magglio 'alone?'

The problem is that when most GM's look to put a team together they need to look at the team's budget and holes that need filling. They look at what they have in terms of talent and contracts and assess their value. They then can go out and asses the value of players around the league and how they fit in their team budgetwise and talent wise.

So, you always say I don't offer a solution to anything (untrue but you say it) so how much of a risk would you take on Magglio? Would you give him $70 mill over 5 years right now without seeing his knee? So pretend your KW. You have a prick of an agent who won't let you see his clients knee but is assuring you everything will be fine by Dec (see Sunday's Trib). You have a cheap owner who according to Sat. Trb, offered Magglio a contract very close to the 5 year $70 mill he was asking for.

I'll tell you what I'd do. Because I think it's ridiculous not to do your due diligence on a player before making investing millions in him I would only negotiate after my docotrs see his knee. I mean if he health weren't an issue then Boras would be inviting everyone andt heir grandmother over to see him. At least that's what I'd think. Assuming he checks out fine I'd offer him a 2 year contract at $5-7 mill per plus another $8-10 mill in incentives.

What would you do Lip if you were KW? Knowing what you know now, take a stance for once.


Bob

Lip Man 1
10-17-2004, 01:02 PM
Sorry Bob...you're not going to bait into that one. When someone starts paying me a G.M.'s salary then I'll make a G.M.'s decisions. I could not even hazard a guess. Again as you have pointed out, often and with great delight, economics are not my forte'. All I care about is winning. Something entirely foreign to many of the posters on these boards.

You'll also find that I have never tried posting proposed trades, I have occasionally posted players that I'd like to see the Sox get but that's as far as it goes. Unlike the stat geeks I don't have the time nor the inclination to pour over numbers for three hours to put together laughable trade proposals.

and Flight says..."How about one big reason being that owners only get involved with superstar players, and the Sox haven't been involved in negotiations on any of Bora$$ superstar guys since then. (I'm not even sure which of his superstar players have been on the market since then, but the Sox would only have considered any that were pitchers.)"

Flight you beat me to it. Thank you. I was going to post this myself. This is another indictment of this organization and why they haven't won squat.

Great players...superstar players...forget it, not here. (and yes I know about Albert Belle. Who was here for all of two years, had a goofy Reinsdorfian clause inserted into his contract for a reason and the organization had such faith in his signing that nine months after he signed his deal, you had the White Flag Trade. Coincidence? Try 'shell game.'

Lip

StillMissOzzie
10-17-2004, 06:19 PM
I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel MUCH better now that Dr. Bora$ has informed the world that Maggs' knee is recovering nicely and that he'll be ready to play come April.

What a tool. "He'll be fine, trust me, but you can't examine that knee unless you're a serious bidder".

Promises like this from Bora$ should be added to the other 3 great lies of the world.

SMO
:angry:

TheBull19
10-18-2004, 02:59 AM
Just go back over the years and see how they have always been fairly active in the off season. I can go back to the 80's wondering how in the hell they were able to get pretty good players like Spier, Trillo, Buechele, Matthews, Bowa, Dernier etc. to play for them.
Well, they traded for Matthews, Bowa, Dernier and Trillo, Spier was pretty much washed up and Buechelle? Wasn't exactly George Brett.

Foulke29
10-18-2004, 10:20 AM
At the same time, the best deal is not necessarily the most $$$. If Alex Rodrieguez could do it over again, do you think he might choose to sign for less money somewhere other than the Rangers? And that lesson is not lost on other players. I don't think Beltran or Ordonez will automatically sign with whoever offers the most money.
Hmmm - no offense meant, but I feel that's not an accurate statement. A-Rod wanted the money and 10 year contract that year - and he was going to where ever the most money on a ten year contract came from. He knew very well that if he had played well during that time that he could be traded.

It may not be about the physical use of the money, but there no doubt in my mind that it's about the money and having that status of being the highest paid player in baseball. Make no mistake. A-rod is a money grubbing whore who cried after he was paid, and Borass is his pimp.

And now that Ordonez is with Borass - I say this: I hope he doesn't earn more than a few million a year due to the skepticism surrounding his knee. He had a chance at a generous contract, but wanted the status. I mean come on! How much more money do you need than $75 million dollars?:angry:

Being that Boras is a piece of crap, I'm surprised he's not representing Adam Dunn yet.

Foulke29
10-18-2004, 10:25 AM
Knowing that piece of crap, Bora$$, he'll probably sell tickets to GMs to allow the doctors to exam the knee and get a significant cut out of it.

I hate to say it again, but when I think about it, Magglio actually got what he asked for/deserved. He missed his opportunity.

I never would have felt that before Bora$$ was involved, but I sure do now.

Ol' No. 2
10-18-2004, 10:35 AM
Hmmm - no offense meant, but I feel that's not an accurate statement. A-Rod wanted the money and 10 year contract that year - and he was going to where ever the most money on a ten year contract came from. He knew very well that if he had played well during that time that he could be traded.

It may not be about the physical use of the money, but there no doubt in my mind that it's about the money and having that status of being the highest paid player in baseball. Make no mistake. A-rod is a money grubbing whore who cried after he was paid, and Borass is his pimp.

And now that Ordonez is with Borass - I say this: I hope he doesn't earn more than a few million a year due to the skepticism surrounding his knee. He had a chance at a generous contract, but wanted the status. I mean come on! How much more money do you need than $75 million dollars?:angry:

Being that Boras is a piece of crap, I'm surprised he's not representing Adam Dunn yet.When Rodrieguez signed his contract with Texas they told him that they were going to put the players around him to build a winner. Yes, he took the highest bid, but I doubt that he would have if he had known that he was joining a team that would finish last every year he was there. He was sure willing to give back money to get the hell out of there.

Foulke29
10-18-2004, 10:48 AM
When Rodrieguez signed his contract with Texas they told him that they were going to put the players around him to build a winner. Yes, he took the highest bid, but I doubt that he would have if he had known that he was joining a team that would finish last every year he was there. He was sure willing to give back money to get the hell out of there.
I hear what you're saying, and many of us know the story that was sold to him - G.W. style, but anyone with half a brain knew that the players weren't there and that there was no pitching on the way.

If A-rod thought that Texas would be a good team, he was lying to himself. Furthermore, it's easy to agree to give some of the money back when the only two teams showing interest in you are the Red Sox and Yankees.

I dunno. I really think A-rod was a whore yelling, "Show me the money!" back then. If it was really a matter of moving to a team that had a proven track record of being a winner, why didn't he sign with Atlanta - which was closer to his home than Texas? Their contract was for 3 million dollars less a year than the quarter of a billion dollars - stop and think about that for a minute - quarter of a billion dollars.

Magglio is doing the same thing - and now Boras is stooping to new lows by feeding the press a bunch of BS about his knee and then not allowing any one to look at it.

Ol' No. 2
10-18-2004, 11:01 AM
I hear what you're saying, and many of us know the story that was sold to him - G.W. style, but anyone with half a brain knew that the players weren't there and that there was no pitching on the way.That's easy to say in hindsight. For whatever reason, he believed the Rangers. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure he would have taken a bit less to go elsewhere, and his willingness to give money back to go to a winning team supports that.

As for Maggs, I can't believe any team in their right mind would offer a contract without having their docters examine him. Boras can say whatever he wants to say, but that's the reality. I can see a point, though, in limiting it to teams that are truly interested and not subjecting his client to examination by a bunch of tire-kickers.

Foulke29
10-18-2004, 11:08 AM
I can see a point, though, in limiting it to teams that are truly interested and not subjecting his client to examination by a bunch of tire-kickers.
To call a team that already has a history of making an offer that was very close to what he requested 'tire kickers' is a bit an exaggeration, don't you think?

gosox41
10-18-2004, 11:09 AM
Sorry Bob...you're not going to bait into that one. When someone starts paying me a G.M.'s salary then I'll make a G.M.'s decisions. I could not even hazard a guess. Again as you have pointed out, often and with great delight, economics are not my forte'. All I care about is winning. Something entirely foreign to many of the posters on these boards.

You'll also find that I have never tried posting proposed trades, I have occasionally posted players that I'd like to see the Sox get but that's as far as it goes. Unlike the stat geeks I don't have the time nor the inclination to pour over numbers for three hours to put together laughable trade proposals.

and Flight says..."How about one big reason being that owners only get involved with superstar players, and the Sox haven't been involved in negotiations on any of Bora$$ superstar guys since then. (I'm not even sure which of his superstar players have been on the market since then, but the Sox would only have considered any that were pitchers.)"

Flight you beat me to it. Thank you. I was going to post this myself. This is another indictment of this organization and why they haven't won squat.

Great players...superstar players...forget it, not here. (and yes I know about Albert Belle. Who was here for all of two years, had a goofy Reinsdorfian clause inserted into his contract for a reason and the organization had such faith in his signing that nine months after he signed his deal, you had the White Flag Trade. Coincidence? Try 'shell game.'

Lip
Sounds like a I already baited you. First, when I criticize something you challenge me to offer a solution. I challenged you to offer a solution and you backed down. Looks like you're leaving yourself open so you can fully criticize JR.

I can see it now. If the Sox sign Magglio to a 5 year contract worth $11 mill per and Magglio has a degenerative knee you'll be all over him for doing do. If Magglio signs a 2 year contract elsewhere for $15 mill. and he turns into Babe Ruth, you will criticize JR for not taking the risk.

The good thing about this website, Lip, is that you can offer an opinion or a solution (especially when you criticize others for not) and the worst thing that can happenis you're wrong and someone points it out. Big deal. Everyone's been wrong before. You admitted above you don't have a business background, but you seem to have a strong opinion of how JR is cheaping out even though you yourself admitted you don't know all the facts of economics or business let alone the specific facts about running a baseball team.

There was nothing batied in the question. I just wanted to hear your solution. Obviously your solution is to wait and see what happens so if JR screws up you can criticize him.

I may even start a thread on asking people this. See who can come up with an opinion instead of just judging after the fact.


Bob

Ol' No. 2
10-18-2004, 11:19 AM
To call a team that already has a history of making an offer that was very close to what he requested 'tire kickers' is a bit an exaggeration, don't you think?The Sox made an offer at one time, but it's not currently on the table. Are they really serious about wanting to re-sign him? Or are they just looking to cover their ass before offering arbitration? I'm just trying to look at it from both sides, and I can see a point in limiting it to teams that are really interested.

gosox41
10-18-2004, 11:21 AM
The Sox made an offer at one time, but it's not currently on the table. Are they really serious about wanting to re-sign him? Or are they just looking to cover their ass before offering arbitration? I'm just trying to look at it from both sides, and I can see a point in limiting it to teams that are really interested.
Whyh not keep it open to all 30 teams? Boras is doing that for Beltran.



Bob

Foulke29
10-18-2004, 11:23 AM
Whyh not keep it open to all 30 teams? Boras is doing that for Beltran.



Bob
I'll tell you why: Magglio Ordonez's career = over.

gosox41
10-18-2004, 11:26 AM
I'll tell you why: Magglio Ordonez's career = over.
I tend to agree. Only because Boras is so intent on letting 'serious teams' see his knee. Someone should ask Boras flat out: Why not show it to everyone and let everyone in the free marketplace place a bid?

Boras is hiding something. And it may be the long term effects of the bone marrow edema more then the second torn meniscus.


Bob

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 12:09 PM
and Flight says..."How about one big reason being that owners only get involved with superstar players, and the Sox haven't been involved in negotiations on any of Bora$$ superstar guys since then. (I'm not even sure which of his superstar players have been on the market since then, but the Sox would only have considered any that were pitchers.)"

Flight you beat me to it. Thank you. I was going to post this myself. This is another indictment of this organization and why they haven't won squat.

Great players...superstar players...forget it, not here. (and yes I know about Albert Belle. Who was here for all of two years, had a goofy Reinsdorfian clause inserted into his contract for a reason and the organization had such faith in his signing that nine months after he signed his deal, you had the White Flag Trade. Coincidence? Try 'shell game.'

Lip
You have an interesting definition of "shell game". To me, if a team puts something together and it's not working, adjusting to it is called "smart". The facts surrounding the WFT are that they weren't going to resign Darwin, Alvarez, Hernandez because their agents wanted big $$$, long-term deals that they weren't worth (and looking back, did you really want them to be tied to any of those guys?). So it was a decision to get some value for them or let them walk at the end of the year. The $$$ saved were relatively inconsequential since none of them were big $$ players.

Once you're rebuilding, holding on to an injured, bad attitude, guy the fans hate who has a big salary is pretty dumb when you have the option to get rid of him. Once the team improved, guess what - they went out and traded for a big $$$ player in David Wells. So when the team is bad, they cut back on big contracts, and when the team is good, they add them - seems appropriate to me.

As for Boras, without having a list of players, it's meaningless to try and use that to slam the Sox (not that that will stop you). For example: If his palyers were Manny Ramirez, Vladimir Guerrero, and Sammy Sosa I wouldn't expect the Sox to even consider getting into the bidding because they had 2 pretty good corner OFs already: Maggs & Lee. Any resources are better spent in other areas, unless you're going to field a Yankees/BoSox type of payroll. If the team this year was healthy, would you rather have had Vlady or traded for & resigned Garcia? But making that decision is "an indictment of the organization" according to you.

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 12:12 PM
Sounds like a I already baited you. First, when I criticize something you challenge me to offer a solution. I challenged you to offer a solution and you backed down. Looks like you're leaving yourself open so you can fully criticize JR.

Bob

Dingdingdingding!!!!

The problem is not the criticism, it's that the criticism is made with 100% hindsight, and that the attribution to any root cause is made without much of a basis. I.e. if Frank goes down and the Sox don't have an equivalent replacement it's because JR is cheap. If they sign a guy and he doesn't pan out, it's because JR is cheap.

The Red Sox don't have a good "replacement" for Schilling, so I guess they're pretty cheap too.

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 01:23 PM
Flight:

They do have a good replacement, Pedro Martinez. He and Schilling are better then any two pitchers on the White Sox staff you care to name. That's because they paid for that privilege.

Bob:

All I'll say in regards to Magglio is that the Sox deserve to have a look at that injured knee before deciding if they want to place a bid. That's only fair given the nature of the injury.

As far as criticism all I care about is winning. If the Sox have to overpay for talent too bad, if Uncle Jerry has to go into debt too bad. If he can't handle it or isn't willing to take the risk then sell the team.

As you've stated Bob ad infinitum, I'm not a businessman, I have no knowledge of budgets. (and on a personal note that is reflected in my private life as well.) My throwing names out of a hat with no knowledge of baseball economics would be meaningless, much like the numerous trade proposals that have people postulating how the Sox can get a superstar for three garbage players.

It's not the criticism in this case it's that I honestly have no idea how much a player is worth. To me that player is worth as much money as you care to name if he brings the Sox closer to winning, multiply that by 24 other times plus a manager and you have my opinion.

Lip

gosox41
10-18-2004, 01:37 PM
Flight:

Bob:

All I'll say in regards to Magglio is that the Sox deserve to have a look at that injured knee before deciding if they want to place a bid. That's only fair given the nature of the injury.

As far as criticism all I care about is winning. If the Sox have to overpay for talent too bad, if Uncle Jerry has to go into debt too bad. If he can't handle it or isn't willing to take the risk then sell the team.

As you've stated Bob ad infinitum, I'm not a businessman, I have no knowledge of budgets. (and on a personal note that is reflected in my private life as well.) My throwing names out of a hat with no knowledge of baseball economics would be meaningless, much like the numerous trade proposals that have people postulating how the Sox can get a superstar for three garbage players.

It's not the criticism in this case it's that I honestly have no idea how much a player is worth. To me that player is worth as much money as you care to name if he brings the Sox closer to winning, multiply that by 24 other times plus a manager and you have my opinion.

Lip
You don't need to be a businessman to make an opinion about a player the team should pursue. Just a fan. Don't look at it as you being KW, think of it as what is Magglio worth to you to have on this team.

To paraphrase you, we all want to win. But you don't offer realistic solutions to what ails the team.

Also, does this mean you won't be criticizing JR if Magglio goes elsewhere and has a monster career or stays here and rots on the bench because he's injured? I find it hard to criticize someone when I never had an opinion to begin with.

Last, my guess is if you were running the Sox and spending money galore (which you wouldn't because all of the sudden it would be your financial risk) this team would be in a much worse position as you surely would have violated the 40% debt rule and would be forced to cut payroll a ton to paydown debt.


Bob

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 01:58 PM
Bob:

Here's my attitude about economics (and I resent you saying that you know how I'd react if I owned the team..with respect, you don't know s#$% about me.) This is my personal philosophy.

I'm 49 years old, I don't own any stocks, bonds, or have a 401k. I've never been able to afford any of these things. My checking account right now stands at 17 dollars. I have no savings. (Although I do have life insurance...) My wife and I live day to day.

My philosophy is that I can get hit by a car tomorrow, or I can slip and break my neck. If I want something and can't afford it (within some reason) I'm going to get it anyway because nothing is guaranteed, especially tomorrow.

I'm in debt and it bothers me somewhat but the reality is that I'll probably be dead in 20 years anyway so who cares. What are the creditors going to do, go into my coffin?

This is not being sarcastic, and not overstating the facts...there are the facts.

Now you know how I'd run the White Sox. The bottom line is winning, ALL else...profits, debts, pissing off the board members (although in your scenario I own the team) is of no consequence.

I hope I've answered your question.

As far as Magglio I can't blame the Sox for being cautious because this is a serious injury and as stated they have the right to examine it. However it does say something if, as has been the case so far, that Magglio refuses to allow them to do this. The question is why? My opinion will of course differ from yours. But no I can't blame the Sox on this one, personally I knew he wasn't coming back even BEFORE the injury. But that's a different subject isn't it.

Lip

gosox41
10-18-2004, 02:52 PM
Bob:

Here's my attitude about economics (and I resent you saying that you know how I'd react if I owned the team..with respect, you don't know s#$% about me.) This is my personal philosophy.

I'm 49 years old, I don't own any stocks, bonds, or have a 401k. I've never been able to afford any of these things. My checking account right now stands at 17 dollars. I have no savings. (Although I do have life insurance...) My wife and I live day to day.

My philosophy is that I can get hit by a car tomorrow, or I can slip and break my neck. If I want something and can't afford it (within some reason) I'm going to get it anyway because nothing is guaranteed, especially tomorrow.

I'm in debt and it bothers me somewhat but the reality is that I'll probably be dead in 20 years anyway so who cares. What are the creditors going to do, go into my coffin?

This is not being sarcastic, and not overstating the facts...there are the facts.

Now you know how I'd run the White Sox. The bottom line is winning, ALL else...profits, debts, pissing off the board members (although in your scenario I own the team) is of no consequence.

I hope I've answered your question.

As far as Magglio I can't blame the Sox for being cautious because this is a serious injury and as stated they have the right to examine it. However it does say something if, as has been the case so far, that Magglio refuses to allow them to do this. The question is why? My opinion will of course differ from yours. But no I can't blame the Sox on this one, personally I knew he wasn't coming back even BEFORE the injury. But that's a different subject isn't it.

Lip
At least we agree the Sox should be cautious. It would be bad if this team wants to win to tie up a lot of money in a guy who may have a career threatening injury.


Bob

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 02:59 PM
Flight:

They do have a good replacement, Pedro Martinez. He and Schilling are better then any two pitchers on the White Sox staff you care to name. That's because they paid for that privilege.


That's like saying the Sox had a replacement for Frank or Maggs - Konerko (or Lee, or ARow). Pedro is their #2 starter, if you want to make him #1 after Schilling goes down, fine. Then the same argument can be made about Pedro - those cheap bastards the Red Sox didn't have a solid replacement for Pedro.

It's not always tied back to your mantra of "JR is cheap", unless you're going to apply that same mantra to everyone but NY.

And by the way - did you notice that the owner you often hold up as an example: Arte Moreno is reportedly slashing payroll to the $90-mil range? That cheap bastard, obviously he doesn't care about winning since he signed bigname FAs only to cut payroll a mere 9-12 months later!!!

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 04:47 PM
Flight: a few points...

I'd love to 'just' have a 90 million dollar payroll. Also Moreno is slashing it to that 'poverty' level by getting rid of Glaus who pissed off the organization by not having shoulder surgery last off season and dumping a few beat up back end of the rotation pitchers.

Wanna bet they win 90+ again next season?

In short he isn't cutting a thing of importance.

Lip

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 04:58 PM
Flight: a few points...

I'd love to 'just' have a 90 million dollar payroll. Also Moreno is slashing it to that 'poverty' level by getting rid of Glaus who pissed off the organization by not having shoulder surgery last off season and dumping a few beat up back end of the rotation pitchers.

Wanna bet they win 90+ again next season?

In short he isn't cutting a thing of importance.

Lip
I guess we'll have to differ on the value of Glaus, who'll be healed up and pre-injury, was putting up MVP numbers at 3d base. FYI - He's also playing "hardball" with Jered Weaver, their 1st round draft pick. In short, he's dumping high-paid, productive players and replacing them with lower paid, relatively unproven players while at the same time, holding a hard line on signing his top pick. Yet if the Sox were to say - let Konerko go and replace him with Gload, they'd be cheap bastards.

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 05:00 PM
Gang:

It's not my intention to hijack this thread and if the mods want to move this to another location that's fine.

Since Flight brought this up and overlooked some rather 'important' items. I feel it necessary to respond in kind.

1. At the time of the WFT the Sox were 3 1/2 games out of first. Mind you not five out, or eight out, or ten out but 3 1/2. Never before or since in baseball history, has a team pulled this stunt when so close to first place.

2. The Sox had just got back Robin Ventura who destroyed his leg in March. That was like making a last minute deal to improve the club.

3. Hindsight is the only way to judge 'prospects' that you acquire and it's significant to hear what Uncle Jerry had to say directly about this...

"It's obvious we're disappointed with the way our ballclub has played this year, with our record... no question about it. We were faced with losing Alvarez and Roberto and getting nothing, as we did with Alex (Fernandez). Now we’ve added a half dozen talented young players. Two or three have a chance of being stars, according to our scouts. . . . If they're half right, we're in great shape." -- Chicago Tribune, August 1, 1997


"This team had a chance, and it didn't seize it. It was hard to look at this team and feel very confident. I wasn't interested in finishing second in a poker hand. Yesterday I said we had no chance of catching Cleveland, today I'm not so sure." -- To Phil Rogers / Chicago Tribune.

Reinsdorf overlooked of course, the devastating effect Ventura’s injury had on team morale and his front offices inability to compensate for it via trade back in April. He was also wrong about the Sox being able to catch Cleveland after the deal and he was wrong on the quality of the players he got in return. NONE ever made the All Star Team with the Sox. One NEVER played a day in the major leagues and the other only had a smattering of games with the Sox one season.

If you are going to make your franchise a national embarassment with ramifications felt attendence wise for years, at least try to get some talent back O.K.? Keith Foulke and maybe Bob Howrey were the only players who made any type of contribution to the Sox.

3. Before Flight says 'Alvarez, Hernandez and Darwin never did a damn thing afterwards anyway' (as if to somehow justify quitting...) the fact is that Roberto Hernandez had 163 saves and an All Star appearance AFTER the deal, including 43 in 1999. That's not exactly 'nothing.'

If anyone wishes to read an in depth analysis of the deal from the Sox and Giants points of view along with news excerpts from that time period, you may want to read this:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=2&id=1528

Lip

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 05:03 PM
Flight says: "Yet if the Sox were to say - let Konerko go and replace him with Gload, they'd be cheap bastards."

Ironic because that's exactly what may take place.

When the White Sox win a World Series (like the Angels), hell when the White Sox get to a World series they can do any damn thing they want as far as I'm concerned.

Lip

jabrch
10-18-2004, 05:10 PM
Flight says: "Yet if the Sox were to say - let Konerko go and replace him with Gload, they'd be cheap bastards."

Ironic because that's exactly what may take place.

When the White Sox win a World Series (like the Angels), hell when the White Sox get to a World series they can do any damn thing they want as far as I'm concerned.

Lip
Yeah - cuz then you will stop complaining? Color me skeptical.

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 05:20 PM
If you are going to make your franchise a national embarassment with ramifications felt attendence wise for years, at least try to get some talent back O.K.? Keith Foulke and maybe Bob Howrey were the only players who made any type of contribution to the Sox.That's fine, except that your continued comments about JR being cheap don't apply here. He let the baseball guys make a baseball decision. That's what owners are supposed to do. If it didn't pan out, that's on them, not on him. Unless you really think he came down and said "Make sure you get marginally talented players in return, those talented guys end up being too expensive"

3. Before Flight says 'Alvarez, Hernandez and Darwin never did a damn thing afterwards anyway' (as if to somehow justify quitting...) the fact is that Roberto Hernandez had 163 saves and an All Star appearance AFTER the deal, including 43 in 1999. That's not exactly 'nothing.'



LipAnd the Sox got a bunch of saves from Howry & Foulke in the following years. 'Berto also blew 9/35 saves in 1998, and did so at quite a hefty salary. But regardless, if you're rebuilding, you dont' hold on to an expensive reliever.

The point is not that I think it was right to give up there, the point is that JR did not come down and say "cut payroll, trade guys, I need more $$$". It was "if we don't think we can win, then get something of value for the guys who we won't resign". Like you, I would rather have seen the team go for it, but unlike you I did not actually think that they were going to succeed, so I understood getting something of longer term value for something that was unlikely to deliver you short or long-term value.

Getting back to the origin of this topic, when the team has promising prospects, they spend but when they don't, they try to retool - that's appropriate. If the wrong guys are making the talent decisions, that falls on ownership, but it's not because they're cheap. IIRC, Schueler was a highly thought of lieutenant before coming over, jsut like almost eveyr other team in baseball hires when their GM jobs come open.

By the way - here's a comment from Sports Illustrated on the deal a few years later:




OK, so this deal has actually worked out in Chicago's favor. But the immediate damage the "White Flag" trade did to team morale -- and the collective psyche of Chisox fans -- was significant

The Giants traded Alvarez and Hernandez to Tampa Bay, where they spent last season collecting fat salaries from the last-place Devil Rays. Darwin was out of baseball by 1998. Meanwhile, the Sox deployed a youth movement that paid dividends even sooner than expected -- in the form of 95 wins and an American League Central title last season. Keith Foulke (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/ml/players/5817/) and Bobby Howry, two of the six prospects they received, have become the anchors of the Sox bullpen. Rookie middle reliever Lorenzo Barcelo (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/ml/players/5867/) evolved from a top prospect into a reliable setup man. Only shortstop Mike Caruso, who was rushed to the majors, then suffered through two subpar seasons, is no longer with the organization.

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 08:12 PM
Barcelo had ONE season where he made a contribution, period. Howry had three before he got hurt. Foulke was the best of the bunch and they screwed him over. If you'd like a more detailed breakdown of all six players feel free to examine the link I posted. 2000 was an unabashed fluke as shown by their record since 2001 and more importantly by their average seasonal record of, (drum roll please...) 83-79 since the start of the 1998 season.

A success? Only according to some fool who hasn't spent over a few days watching this club. Your quote was written obviously in 2001. Me thinks that writer if asked today would have a far different evaluation.

Flight the number of times the Sox have had a chance to win anything is akin to the number of times a Republican is elected Mayor of the city of Chicago. When you get a chance you don't flush it down the toilet as the Sox did and then throw in a urinal cake so that it doesn't smell as bad.

And sometimes I wonder what we argue about, we've both admitted Uncle Jerry is a bad owner. The franchise hasn't won...that's the 'bottom line' when judging ownership. The franchise has lost market share, media coverage, and fans since he took over. I say it's because he's cheap, you say because he doesn't hire good front office people. Doesn't seem to be any difference to me. He hasn't done the job period.

Lip

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 10:15 PM
Barcelo had ONE season where he made a contribution, period. Howry had three before he got hurt. Foulke was the best of the bunch and they screwed him over. If you'd like a more detailed breakdown of all six players feel free to examine the link I posted. 2000 was an unabashed fluke as shown by their record since 2001 and more importantly by their average seasonal record of, (drum roll please...) 83-79 since the start of the 1998 season.

Injuries never make a trade bad unless you traded for an injured player. Maybe that's a difference in how we view things.

And the whole 83-79 point that you seem to think is bad is actually....one of the better records in baseball over that period. That's actually a GOOD thing. What the Sox haven't done is have that 1 great year and a couple of terrible ones, they've been consistently good. There are a ton of teams that would kill for a record like that over a 7-year stretch.

And for the record, I don't think JR is a bad owner, and I don't think I've said that. I think he's average, especially for owners who aren't new (new ones tend to try and make a splash ala Hicks & Moreno, but usually IMO end up being more "fiscally responsible" within a few years).

I might like to think I'd take a more investment-oriented approach, but I don't know that I'd be investing personal $$ to the level that some here think all owners should basically be required to do as part of the privilege of owning a team.

Daver
10-18-2004, 10:43 PM
I might like to think I'd take a more investment-oriented approach, but I don't know that I'd be investing personal $$ to the level that some here think all owners should basically be required to do as part of the privilege of owning a team.
You are, of course, assuming that is personal money.

What was Jerry Reinsdorf paid in salary last year as CEO of the Chicago White Sox baseball Club inc.?

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 11:00 PM
You are, of course, assuming that is personal money.

What was Jerry Reinsdorf paid in salary last year as CEO of the Chicago White Sox baseball Club inc.?
We've had this discussion before:gulp:

Let me say this: If JR (and/or other Sox owners) is indeed skimming significant $$ off the team, then I will join the legions of Lip calling for his head.

voodoochile
10-18-2004, 11:03 PM
We've had this discussion before:gulp:

Let me say this: If JR (and/or other Sox owners) is indeed skimming significant $$ off the team, then I will join the legions of Lip calling for his head.
Does that include or not include the unrealized profit from selling the team? That is part of the profit we are talking about, right?

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 11:05 PM
Does that include or not include the unrealized profit from selling the team? That is part of the profit we are talking about, right?
There's a difference between taking cash off of a team and having the underlying asset increase in value.

voodoochile
10-18-2004, 11:06 PM
There's a difference between taking cash off of a team and having the underlying asset increase in value.
sez you...

Daver
10-18-2004, 11:15 PM
There's a difference between taking cash off of a team and having the underlying asset increase in value.
The only asset the team has is the franchise value, without the franchise it is worth nothing.Jerry Reinsdorf bought the franchise for 21 million, it's value right now is 250 million, give or take. That is a lot of increased borrowing power the way I look at it, especially when it's value is backed up by MLB themselves.

Feel free to continue to listen to JR cry poor though.

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 11:16 PM
sez you...
IMO, owners have a right to asset appreciation, but the team should operate at break-even, or cash-flow neutral (i.e. operating revenues = operating costs including taxes & depreciation).

voodoochile
10-18-2004, 11:20 PM
IMO, owners have a right to asset appreciation, but the team should operate at break-even, or cash-flow neutral (i.e. operating revenues = operating costs including taxes & depreciation).
ARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!

That would work great if the Sox had a huge fanbase that the owner hadn't pissed off and chased away along with most of his top marketing ploys (old stadium, revered and loved announcers, top notch managment talent, Sure HOF players, etc.)

But the opposite is true here. The Sox have GOT to change the way they do business to get the fans back, period. More half-assed measures that include second-place finishes and average records in the weaskest division in baseball are NOT going to do that. The Sox will remain a revenue neutral team with NOTHING to change how much they can spend.

Of course now that the flubbies have finally become media darlings AND a successful team, the Sox can just sit back and wait for the overflow fans to come their way, and JR can raise prices and (in theory) spend more money.

I for one will believe it when I see it. This team is going nowhere slowly with JR at the helm. Hope I am wrong, but somehow I doubt it...

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 11:55 PM
Flight says: "They've been consistently good."

Mathematics was never my strong suit but when 81-81 is perfectly mediocre, a record of 83-79 is in no way, shape, or form (even with the new math) 'good'.Try 'slightly' better then average...very slightly. Especially with one playoff appearance.

I guess Flight you simply have lower standards of good. Perhaps that's because you may not have even been born when the Sox were truly good, consistently good and occasional tremendous during the period of 1951 through 1967.

83-79 is good? Amazing...(and sad...)


Lip

Flight #24
10-19-2004, 12:12 AM
Mathematics was never my strong suit but when 81-81 is perfectly mediocre, a record of 83-79 is in no way, shape, or form (even with the new math) 'good'.Try 'slightly' better then average...very slightly. Especially with one playoff appearance.




LipLip: Good is a relative measure. It wouldn't matter if the Sox were 1 game over .500 if they were better than all the other teams.

You like to refer to the Angels as a "good" team, well since the start of the 1988 season, their average record is......83-79. Minnesota Twins: 81-81. I guess those Twins have been "perfectly mediocre", huh?

You can pretty much pull any stat in a vacuum and use it to make a negative point. But it's just plain inaccurate to do that when the stat ranks them relatively well compared to their competition.

You might as well slam the BoSox because "they haven't won a title, or advanced to a WS in the past decade", or for that matter, the Braves because "they haven't advanced to the WS in 5 years". Both are pretty ludicrous statements, yet the basis for them is factually accurate.

And for the record: Management must have been pretty bad/cheap in the 50s & 60s, huh? After all, they didn't do what it took to take that "good and occasionally tremendous" team to a title.

Daver
10-19-2004, 12:19 AM
And for the record: Management must have been pretty bad/cheap in the 50s & 60s, huh? After all, they didn't do what it took to take that "good and occasionally tremendous" team to a title.
The 1959 Sox played in the World Series.

They didn't win it, but they did make it there, in the days when you had to win your league to make it there.

Flight #24
10-19-2004, 12:27 AM
The 1959 Sox played in the World Series.

They didn't win it, but they did make it there, in the days when you had to win your league to make it there.Allow me to clarify: a World Series title. Not a division title or a league title.

gosox41
10-19-2004, 10:20 AM
Flight: a few points...

I'd love to 'just' have a 90 million dollar payroll. Also Moreno is slashing it to that 'poverty' level by getting rid of Glaus who pissed off the organization by not having shoulder surgery last off season and dumping a few beat up back end of the rotation pitchers.

Wanna bet they win 90+ again next season?

In short he isn't cutting a thing of importance.

Lip
Lip,

They will also lose Percival who still is an effective closer. A

If I knew you enough to bet, I'd bet they don't win 90 next season if they cut their payroll. They may be close, but not 90.


Bob

gosox41
10-19-2004, 10:22 AM
We've had this discussion before:gulp:

Let me say this: If JR (and/or other Sox owners) is indeed skimming significant $$ off the team, then I will join the legions of Lip calling for his head.
If the other investors are concerned about profit margins as people think they are, my guess is they're not paying JR an exorbitatnt salary. I've heard people post here that JR is making $15 mill per year and that's where the Sox profits go. Well, there are about 60-70 other owners that would like a piece of that if that were the case. Of course it isn't.



Bob

maurice
10-19-2004, 01:28 PM
IMO, owners have a right to asset appreciation, but the team should operate at break-even, or cash-flow neutral (i.e. operating revenues = operating costs including taxes & depreciation).
That's a fine general statement. However, even if you think (we can't know) that the Sox spend every dime they take in, depressed revenues are the fault of the current ownership group. Years of crappy marketing and calculated PR disasters have taken their toll. Brooks Boyer really has his work cut out for him. In the meanwhile, the fans suffer while the owners continue to profit handsomely through massive capital gains.