PDA

View Full Version : False Hope


Noneck
06-26-2007, 09:00 PM
Nothing wrong with fans having false hope this year. If it gives them enjoyment by going to and watching games, it's all good.

But false hope by management can be disastrous. I said many times most Sox players have very little trade value, but that is at end of the year. These guys that have no trade value at season end can have value to teams in a playoff hunt. But that can only happen if management is realistic in the Sox chances for this year. They have to win 2 games for every loss at this point to have a shot. Management has to do it NOW so there is not a perception of hope if they have a run and also not to get into a white flag situation.

ThomesHomie
06-26-2007, 09:03 PM
I get false hope every time I get those checks in the mail that claim I won a million dollars.

You really think Kenny and Jerry have false hope ? They know what needs to be done.

Jurr
06-26-2007, 09:05 PM
Nothing wrong with fans having false hope this year. If it gives them enjoyment by going to and watching games, it's all good.

But false hope by management can be disastrous. I said many times most Sox players have very little trade value, but that is at end of the year. These guys that have no trade value at season end can have value to teams in a playoff hunt. But that can only happen if management is realistic in the Sox chances for this year. They have to win 2 games for every loss at this point to have a shot. Management has to do it NOW so there is not a perception of hope if they have a run and also not to get into a white flag situation.
Dude, the Sox have no shot, and most Sox fans are smart enough to realize this. I'd only say that a handful of fans (mostly those that are of the newer variety) would think that magic just happens everyday.

This is a flat team, devoid of the chemistry (and luck) that granted them a world series championship. This era is over, and I'm totally happy with it. We were gifted with the opportunity to celebrate a champ, which is something that our grandparents didn't have a chance to do. It's time to move on.

KW realizes this, and he's not going to stand around and wait for this team to get old and even worse. It's time to bring in some new talent and build a champ for '09 or '10.

Noneck
06-26-2007, 09:32 PM
Oh I realize and don't care if other fans do or not. I just want management to realize and get the biggest return on their assets.

Jurr
06-26-2007, 09:34 PM
Oh I realize and don't care if other fans do or not. I just want management to realize and get the biggest return on their assets.
That's probably why they're waiting.

Noneck
06-26-2007, 09:40 PM
That's probably why they're waiting.

What do you think will happen if the Sox go on a 10-2 run before the All Star break? Will they make moves during the break? And say they start off the second half being hot without making moves. Didn't they back themselves in a corner? I just don't want that situation, thats why I want it now.

kevingrt
06-26-2007, 10:03 PM
I don't think it is false hope at all. I think it is waiting for the best return. If we got a bag of balls for Burly now everyone would be pissed. And from what I have read not much has been offered for Burly. So wait until you get a decent to great deal for him then maybe trade. But if you aren't going to get anything don't trade him. I don't think anyone in this organization or this board has false hope.

TDog
06-26-2007, 11:53 PM
I don't think it is false hope at all. I think it is waiting for the best return. If we got a bag of balls for Burly now everyone would be pissed. And from what I have read not much has been offered for Burly. So wait until you get a decent to great deal for him then maybe trade. But if you aren't going to get anything don't trade him. I don't think anyone in this organization or this board has false hope.

All the Mariners got for Garcia was Miguel Olivo, Jeremy Reed and Mike Morse. Some in the Chicago media referred to the trio of moved Sox as "future Hall of Famers." Many Sox fans were upset that their team was mortgaging its future by not sending Joe Borchard away in Reed's place, although Borchard would bring Matt Thornton to the Sox before the 2006 season.

In 1997, the Sox sent two starters and their closer to the San Francisco Giants for six players, including two pitchers that would become Sox closers, a shortstop who played less than 300 major league games, a right-handed pitcher who pitched 66 big league innings and a southpaw whose major league career lasted just 6.7 innings. There as another player who never made it to the big leagues. The Sox didn't get that much. For two starters and a closer, the Sox got some bullpen help. It wasn't that they got taken in the deal. Observers wrote that these players would be the future. It wasn't even that the Sox gave up the season. The Sox had a better record before the trade than they did after the trade.

But the trade upset people. It gave people a reason to stop going to the games. The prospects the Sox go didn't make the Sox a winner. In 2000, Foulke, Howry and Barcelo were in the bullpen, but only Foulke's contribution was significant, and they could have gotten that had they resigned Hernandez, who ended up getting 32 saves for Tampa Bay that year.

I would be all for trading Mark Buehrle for Alex Rodriguez. But that isn't going to happen. Today's hot prospects often turn out ot be tomorrow's bag of balls.

Nellie_Fox
06-27-2007, 12:51 AM
I get false hope every time I get those checks in the mail that claim I won a million dollars.I don't have to wait for the snail mail; I get several a day in my email. I've won so many internet lotteries that soon I'm going to be so wealthy that I can buy the White Sox and run them however I see fit.

IowaSox1971
06-27-2007, 03:18 AM
There is no reason for the sell-off to start now. Wait until July 15 or July 20 before we start dealing people. In 2001, Oakland was 32-41 (about the same record we have now) and ended up winning 100 games. I'm not necessarily saying that we're going to do that, but it's not yet time to throw in the towel.

Houston had similar records to what we have now in 2004 and 2005 and still ended up winning the wild card both years. Minnesota was struggling a lot last year before catching fire and winning our division.

If Podsednik stays healthy and our bullpen and our offense come around, who knows? We have good starting pitching, and when you have that, you have a chance.

Seattle didn't end up getting much when trading Garcia in 2004, and the same thing could happen to us if we make a bad deal involving Buehrle this year. The way the system is set up, I believe we can get two compensatory first-round draft picks if we lose Buehrle as a free agent, so unless somebody makes us an amazing offer, we should hold onto him.

If we're still 10 games or more under .500 in mid-July or late July, then it might be time to deal some veterans. But not now.

Things can change quickly in a few weeks. Look at the Cubs. A few weeks ago, they were getting in fights with each other and with opposing teams and losing regularly. Now, they are on a hot streak and appear to be a possible playoff contender. If we get on a streak and win 12 out of 15 or somthing like that, we could be right back in contention.

crazyozzie02
06-27-2007, 04:51 AM
Dude, the Sox have no shot, and most Sox fans are smart enough to realize this. I'd only say that a handful of fans (mostly those that are of the newer variety) would think that magic just happens everyday.

This is a flat team, devoid of the chemistry (and luck) that granted them a world series championship. This era is over, and I'm totally happy with it. We were gifted with the opportunity to celebrate a champ, which is something that our grandparents didn't have a chance to do. It's time to move on.

KW realizes this, and he's not going to stand around and wait for this team to get old and even worse. It's time to bring in some new talent and build a champ for '09 or '10.

I couldnt have said it better myself. I am still pretty young (only 20) but i have enough sense to realize its time to rebulid. its often a painful process, but probably not as painful as what we have been exposed to in the last 2 months

Johnny Mostil
06-27-2007, 06:20 AM
FWIW, after Monday night's game, I did check out how teams winning only 30 of their first 72 ultimately fared, and after last night I did the same for teams winning only 31 of their first 73. For anybody possibly thinking postseason (or do I mean postseason!), we're in Boston Braves 1914 territory here. That appears to be the only team to win only 30 of their first 72 (the Braves also had a tie in game 16) and even finish above .500. The Braves' 1914 game-by-game results are here (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BSN/1914_sched.shtml). The "streak analyzer" for the first 73 games, ranking teams by wins in that time, is here (http://www.baseball-reference.com/games/streaks.cgi?games=73&year=ALL&SHOW=TOT&includes=start_year&start_game_val=10&end_game_val=135&teams=ALL&orderby=wins&submit=Find+Streaks). (You'll have to page a wee bit down to get to teams with only 31 wins in that time.)