PDA

View Full Version : Is the rest of AL Central reason for Sox low payroll?


WhiteSoxFan84
11-03-2004, 07:44 PM
This is a question I always bring up when I'm with well educated and realistic White Sox fans; are Minnesota, Detriot, Cleveland, and Kansas City to blame for the Sox having a somewhat low payroll and never being aggressive in the market?

Think about it, all over baseball, there's at least two teams pushing each other to go out and sign a player that makes them better. The ultimate example is the Boston/New York situation in the AL East. Take a look in every other division and you see the Astros, Cardinals, and sCrUBS in the NL Central. The Braves, and Phillies in the NL East. The Angels, Rangers, A's (although their payroll is pretty low, they are always making moves to improve their team) in the AL West. And finally, the Giants, Dodgers, and Padres in the NL West.

At the start of the 2004 season, the Sox had the highest payroll in the AL Central, yet it was 15th in baseball. Although the Twins have been beating the Sox out for the division crown the past 3 years, they haven't been spending any money either. They have been doing it with solid pitchers, amazing defense, and roleplayers that don't go into slumps swinging for the fences. I think if a team like the Cardinals, Padres, Astros, or God forbid the Yankees were in the same division as the White Sox, we'd be forced to spend more money just to compete with that team.

It's kind of sad that in our division, the Tigers, Indians, and Royals can all be labeled as "rebuilding teams", with the Indians a year or two away from being a contender and the Tigers needing a few pitchers to become a division contender. The Royals are a long ways away from anything, but they showed us two years ago that they can pull together and make a run at it without injuries. The Twins are the 3 time defending AL Central Division Champions, labeling them a rebuilding team is just an outrage no matter how young the team is. Fact of the matter is, we should be owning the Royals and Tigers (at least 13-6 vs. each team) and taking the 10-12 every year from the Indians and Twins. That's at least 46 wins in 76 games (46-30), not impossible by ANY means. Then all we'd have to do is win 44 out of the remaining 86 (44-42) games, which is beyond achievable. That would give us a 90-72 record, which should be good enough to win the division every year.

I just wanted to throw this out and see what you people out there think, is the rest of the AL Central the reason the Sox don't spend more money and/or are more aggressive in the free agent's market?

FightingBillini
11-03-2004, 07:59 PM
I dont know if Reinsy takes this into consideration, but I am sure of one thing. The fact that the Twins dont spend makes it so much easy for the Sox not to. People like Hangar, Lip and I will bitch about payroll being too low, and it is. But becuase of the Twins, there are always countless people who come on the thread and :whiner: :whiner: like little biotches. "We dont need to spend, look at the Twins. blah blah blah. You can win without a high payroll."
We are in a significantly bigger market than the other AL Central teams. We should spend more than we do, but becuase of all the JR appoligists, JR isnt forced to. True, you can win without spending much money. You need to produce great young talent. The Sox havent, so they need to spend money if they plan on winning. They don't plan on winning, so they don't spend. I wonder how many whiny comments this post will get.

Lip Man 1
11-03-2004, 08:11 PM
I think it plays a factor. What motivation is there to do better? How many times for example, have you head the organization talk about 'winning the Central,' as opposed to 'winning the pennant?'

Lip

MisterB
11-03-2004, 08:17 PM
We should spend more than we do, but becuase of all the JR appoligists, JR isnt forced to. Nothing and no one can force JR to spend more, period. He doesn't need 'apologists' to validate his spending habits, I think he's made it pretty clear he doesn't look to the fans for anything more than a revenue source. Besides, I think the fans that want him to lay out the cash outnumber the 'apologists' by a pretty good margin.

johnny_mostil
11-03-2004, 08:25 PM
Nothing and no one can force JR to spend more, period. He doesn't need 'apologists' to validate his spending habits, I think he's made it pretty clear he doesn't look to the fans for anything more than a revenue source. Besides, I think the fans that want him to lay out the cash outnumber the 'apologists' by a pretty good margin.
What cash would that be? The money from the three million fans who paid full price to jam the Cell with cheering throngs? The Sox were 21st in attendance.

Daver
11-03-2004, 08:53 PM
What cash would that be? The money from the three million fans who paid full price to jam the Cell with cheering throngs? The Sox were 21st in attendance.
Put a bona fide WS contending team on the field and they would be turning fans away at the gate of Comiskey Park.

RichFitztightly
11-03-2004, 09:42 PM
I think you got it right that the AL Central is the reason the Sox don't spend any money. But it's not because the other teams don't spend money, it's because none of these teams draw any fans to Comiskey. One can certainly use the arguement that the AL Central Teams aren't a big draw in Chicago because they don't spend money, there-by creating the huge cycle of ineptitude that we've all come to love.

Most of us are in agreement that the Sox could draw if they win. They can win by spending money. So the reason I give that the Sox don't spend money because the AL Central teams don't draw any fans, is more my interpretation of the Reinsey Regime's way of thinking. We certainly can't have the team spend money on players when the team doesn't make enough money during the previous season now can we.

:reinsy
*giggles* hehehee

gosox41
11-04-2004, 12:42 AM
I dont know if Reinsy takes this into consideration, but I am sure of one thing. The fact that the Twins dont spend makes it so much easy for the Sox not to. People like Hangar, Lip and I will bitch about payroll being too low, and it is. But becuase of the Twins, there are always countless people who come on the thread and :whiner: :whiner: like little biotches. "We dont need to spend, look at the Twins. blah blah blah. You can win without a high payroll."
We are in a significantly bigger market than the other AL Central teams. We should spend more than we do, but becuase of all the JR appoligists, JR isnt forced to. True, you can win without spending much money. You need to produce great young talent. The Sox havent, so they need to spend money if they plan on winning. They don't plan on winning, so they don't spend. I wonder how many whiny comments this post will get.
Actually the ones who cry like biotches are the one's who think spending solves all problems and complain no matter what the team spends.


Bob

gosox41
11-04-2004, 12:43 AM
I think it plays a factor. What motivation is there to do better? How many times for example, have you head the organization talk about 'winning the Central,' as opposed to 'winning the pennant?'

Lip
Not as many as you think. How many times has KW talked about building a team to go to the WS. Remember the 'I've got one thing to say....1917' quote. Or when he got Wells he said he asked his scouting staff who the team should get to start Game 1 of the playoffs.


Bob

WhiteSoxFan84
11-04-2004, 03:39 AM
I think saying "winning is what attracts fans", is somewhat wrong. Rephrasing that comment and saying, "improving your team year after year without jeopardizing the future", is what attracts fans.

Listen to my theory before you make your reply. What I mean is this; you can be a winning team like the Atlanta Braves and make the playoffs 14 years in a row and still not sellout regular season games even worse, not sell out a divisional round playoff game. I don't know if all of you noticed this or not, but during the first two home games vs. the Houston Astros, there was about 10,000-15,000 empty seats! Now how can you explain that? Simple, the fans know the team is just good enough to win the NL East and lose in the first round of the playoffs. They won't show up until the team IMPROVES and becomes at least a NLCS threat.
Now going back to the White Sox, the fans have proved if you put a winning product on the field, within a week you will have crowds of at least 30,000 per game. Keep winning and every weekend game will be a sellout (unless the Devil Rays are in town but even then we'll have 30,000 in the house). If you think about it, for the past 5 seasons, the White Sox can be considered a "winning team". They have finished over .500 4 of the last 5 years, and the one other year they finished at break even. The next step to be taken here is to IMPROVE the Sox, upgrade them from a "winning team" to a "playoff team". After that is accomplished, the Sox then need to be upgraded to a "pennant contender" and finally a "World Series contender". You can't just take a 81 win team and come back the next year and say, "we will be a World Series contender". Be humble, prove yourself, and then start declaring yourself a threat. Until then, let your fans and media people promote you as that "threat".

SOXSINCE'70
11-04-2004, 08:17 AM
It may have been a valid reason in the past,but if the
Tigers get Derek Lowe and the Tribe continues to improve,
the Sox have no reason for spending the money
(if they have it,that is).


:reinsy

"Bwaaahahahahaha!!! What a dreamer!!"

doublem23
11-04-2004, 09:25 AM
I think saying "winning is what attracts fans", is somewhat wrong. Rephrasing that comment and saying, "improving your team year after year without jeopardizing the future", is what attracts fans.

I think comparing the Braves' post-season attendance woes with the Sox attendance problems is a bit misguided. Tell you what, let's see if the Sox win 14 division crowns in a row before we can truly eyeball each situation on a level playing field.

Plus, I don't think many people make up their mind to go to a game based on what they think the team will look like in 3 years. The Warthogs, Knights, and Barons could be a combined 700 games under .500 but if the Sox are playing good, competitive baseball, they will draw 30,000 a game, minimum.

Lip Man 1
11-04-2004, 01:07 PM
White Sox fan:

Look up the payroll numbers of the Braves the past 14 years.

Look at the number of free agent signings and big name player trades they made during that time period.

Look at who the G.M. is for most (if not all) of that period.

and the Braves were blessed by having a group of starting pitchers when the streak began, that were incredibly good AND incredibly durable. Some from their farm system and some acquired by trades.

That's why the Braves did what they did... a remarkable accomplishment

Lip

WhiteSoxFan84
11-04-2004, 02:58 PM
No doubt what the Braves did was amazing, and still is because they won the division again this year. I think my last post was misunderstood. What I meant is that the Braves have been a playoff team 14 years and counting but their fan interest is not at 100%, it might not even be at 90%. And I find that kind of odd considering the Braves have done what they've done. But, all those trades they made and free agents they brought in, offset the players they lost to FA or traded away. So year after year they have been the same team with different faces. They lose Gary Sheffield, they trade for J.D. Drew. They lose Javy Lopez 2 years ago, they trade for Johnny Estrada. All they did was maintain the same team just with different players. My point was they need to improve from a playoff team into a World Series contender. Comparing them the ChiSox, they need to improve from a above .500 team to a playoff team and so on.

Now about the "jeopardizing the future" comment, I didn't mean making the Knights, Warthogs, and Barons all winning teams, I meant not trading away Josh Fogg, Sean Lowe, and Kip Wells for Todd Ritchie and watching Ritchie stink up the joint and leaving you after a year. I love KW, don't get me wrong there, and having his arms tied behind his back with a low payroll doesn't make things any easier on him, but things could have been done differently and we would have been in a much better position today.

Hangar18
11-04-2004, 03:45 PM
[QUOTE=WhiteSoxFan84]This is a question I always bring up when I'm with well educated and realistic White Sox fans; are Minnesota, Detriot, Cleveland, and Kansas City to blame for the Sox having a somewhat low payroll and never being aggressive in the market?
QUOTE]

Heck Yes. JERRY REIN$DORF figures because there are Small Market Teams
in our division, the division can be won with minimal Financial effort on the Sox part. Fate has slapped Uncle Jerry in the face 4 yrs in a row, yet he doesnt get it. Thats why I said back in the day, had Pud Selig kept his nose out of it, and The Messiah were a Twin instead of a Flub, It wouldve FORCED the Sox to be a way better team, than what they currently are. YES soxfan84,
there is some Merit to your assertion.

Hangar18
11-04-2004, 03:48 PM
I think it plays a factor. What motivation is there to do better? How many times for example, have you head the organization talk about 'winning the Central,' as opposed to 'winning the pennant?'

LipExcellent Post. The media is somewhat to blame also, because they Keep Saying "AL CENTRAL is weakest division ever" when we knew CLeveland was Very Good and getting Better, and that the Twinks have an EXCELLENT Farm system with guys that can Bunt, Run, Pitch. Detroit has now gotten better also ....... so Nothing is Handed to the Sox, despite what people Predict.
The Sox still have to get out there and play, Holes-in-lineup and all.
The SOX organization seems to think the AL Central Division is owed to them
or something .......... so good for the Twins for beating us down every time :angry:

FightingBillini
11-04-2004, 07:04 PM
Wait, back in the late 90's when the Indians were winning, wasnt their payroll among the tops?