captain54

QUOTE (Tony @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:14 PM) Yes sir. This is only the start. Long overdue. Stoney called this on the SCORE yesterday. Eaton next to go

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2016 -> 01:05 PM) Seriously, why does anyone else have to care that you are bitter and angry? If you have a problem with me, at least do everyone else on Soxtalk the favor of keeping it in conversations with me. There is zero need for a grown man to be throwing temper tantrums in situations that aren't even relevant to where the person hurt your feelings. At the end of the day, no one else should have to deal with your pouting. I mean if you can't handle an opinion other than your own without feeling insulted, you probably should move on to safer spaces than the internet. Nobody is bitter, angry, or throwing temper tantrums, my friend... But I get how it works for you, to paint that tableau..the pattern with you is as predictable as the air we breath, if anyone is negative or critical of the organization, they are automatically pegged as bitter, angry and borderline lunatic..... So go for it, by all means... I don't need you to tell me where I should be moving to or how I conduct myself.. thanks anyway.. If you'd like for me to completely ignore you and never post again in response to anything you say or do.. I'd be happy to oblige, if it really bothers you that much.just say the word young man... But in the real world, when you make statements that people might not agree with.. be prepared to take the heat, son...

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Nov 7, 2016 -> 01:00 PM) As an outsider to this conversation, not sure what you're adding to the board with these types of comments and attacks? IMO, SS is a great poster and brings a lot to the table. Maybe some of his comments weren't all that inaccurate? Having grown up outside of Illinois, but having been a die hard Sox fan since I was a young child due to my father - I can't say I disagree with some of what you said above. Sox fans on a whole a pretty fickle, negative, and somewhat disloyal group. Obviously not saying all are....but from reading this board and WSI over the years and encountering more and more Sox fans as I get older...there is large chunk that fit that description. You're entitled to your opinion.. and if you think Sox fans are as a fickle bunch, I can say first hand that a good majority of us have stuck with the Sox through some pretty rough times . You live outside of Illinois and if it's convenient for you to generalize the group in the manner you've described.. again, that's your opinion..go for it.. but I would say you don't really have a grasp of the big picture...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2016 -> 12:48 PM) It is rather amusing how thin your skin is that you feel the need to take personal shots at me constantly, even when not in a discussion with you. You have no problem spouting your opinion and not hiding the fact that you have a pretty disparaging view of Sox fans..., disloyal, inferior to Cub fans in terms of quality of their fandom...etc .. and recently, pretty much discounted Sox history or anyone with any recollection of it pre-1985, as totally irrelevant Does it ever occur to you that some folks might take offense to that? feel insulted by that? But when challenged, you start whining and crying that you're being picked on... .. talk about thin skin, guy... sheesh..

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2016 -> 12:02 PM) You and Thad can post JR has to go a million more times, and you may be correct, but, he isn't going to go, so why bother? I'm fully aware JR isn't going anywhere... and I'm aware he's not referring to Soxtalk.com or any other site for suggestions on how to change his ways... Why bother? because we can talk about this and that, and analyze the crap out of all of this stuff.. It's all flotsam and jetsam.. and it's all good, but let's try to keep in mind the source of these ills By the way, I googled "flotsam and jetsam", to make sure it was grammatically correct.. to make sure Officer SSDR2K2 of the Grammatics and Semantics Police didn't bust me with a citation.. Just trying to keep in in perspective for y'all. Think of it as a Public Service... You're Welcome..

QUOTE (Tony @ Nov 7, 2016 -> 10:18 AM) The draft is just part of the problem. You can look at what other teams have drafted and look at their 1st round picks and success rate, but that's like trying to diagnose an unknown illness and only looking at 1/3 of the persons body. There is much more to the story. Simply put, the Sox have done an incredibly poor job of identifying talent. In the draft, in trades and in free agent signings. You can create all the lists you want, go nuts. The only list you need to look at is playoff appearances the last 15 years. That gives you the clearest diagnoses there is. Before I begin, please don't go all SSDR2K2 on me and attribute my comment to bias, or anger, or fabrication, or whatever any other non sensical excuse may come to your brain.. But, a string of unsuccessful seasons such as the Sox have had, starts at the top... Using the medical analogy, it's like trying to diagnose a person with a blood disorder, or poor circulation, etc.. and not doing any sort of critical examination or testing of the heart... You would have to believe in terms of evaluating talent, scouting talent, drafting.. the proper people have not been hired to work these areas OR, the qualified people are in place and JR is fully involved in these day to day decisions...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 6, 2016 -> 08:44 PM) Well yeah, I think if you're going to tell others why their concept is flawed then telling us a better way seems like a logical next request. Yes, it could blow up in our faces. I don't see that as any worse than where they are right now. A 4th place team is not that much better than a 5th place team and shouldn't be treated as a major accomplishment worth protecting. 8 playoff misses in a row isn't an accomplishment. The Sox are not 1 or 2 players away, they are multiple players away. Other teams that are 1 or 2 players away are looking at a thin FA market to address those needs. The Sox are in a unique position to capitalize on a situation that is wholly in their favor by maximizing their assets in a major way A playoff miss with a roster that is learning how to win, is a lot more fun to watch than a playoff miss that has the same stench of the last 8 yrs

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Nov 5, 2016 -> 10:27 AM) It's real, by a Polka group called Captain Stubby and the Buccaneers. It was released in 1959. I always enjoyed the song myself. Mark Lil Wally Jagiello was the brain child of that song in 59'.. Lil Wally was a very popular Polka musician in Chicago in the 50s and 60s.. I have a couple of relatives who actually knew Lil Wally... He was only about 5'5", thus Lil Wally.... The song was originally written and recorded as an actual Polka. Captain Stubby was not really a Polka group. They were a popular "jingle" band in Chicago in 50'a. In the days before ad agencies just dropped pre-recorded behind commercial.. they had actual musicians come in and record the music beds TV and Radio Commercials... Captain Stubby sped up Lil Wally's tune, made it less "Polka".. and the rest is history... Lil Wally was a HUGE White Sox fan.. He died in 2006...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 04:30 PM) You and I have very different views on evidence apparently. I mean there are a ton of non sequitors in the post that sound great and compelling together, but none of that is the actual point. The same guy that said the Cubs were the dominant ball team in Chicago in the late 50s and 60s is a stickler for "facts" Thanks for making my night. Have a lovely evening

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 03:27 PM) And just for the record, it is keister, and this isn't really economics as much as it is finance. Economics is a very different field. from the Urban Dictionary: keyster a term for storing contraband in your rectum, common in prison From the American Economic Association: Economics can actually be defined a few different ways: it’s the study of scarcity, the study of how people use resources, or the study of decision-making. Economics often involves topics like wealth, finance, recessions, and banking,

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 03:27 PM) Since you seem to know. How many investors did the Cubs take on, and at what percentage did they buy in at? What portion of their debt service was paid off and what portion remains? And just for the record, it is keister, and this isn't really economics as much as it is finance. Economics is a very different field. thank you for the lesson in semantics.. I wouldn't really bother responding, but what the hell. .. here goes another 10 minutes or so of my life I'll never get back.. the implication in your post is that you seem to imply the Ricketts haven't quite got it figured out. they have incurred far too much debt and are incurring far too much payroll...why else would you even mention this? it's pointless... The value of the Cubs franchise has substantially increased since 2009.. the debt service payment is a drop in the bucket.. especially with a new TV deal on the horizon Do some of your own research on Cubs investors, please.... I'm not here to feed you information.... Also do some research on how the debt was configured to go long term.. to 2022 at minimum... and what that actually means.. The issue with the Cubs debt is more with the MLB Debt Service Rule than anything..

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 12:06 PM) Any debt payment is money that isn't able to go towards payroll. It isn't really that complex. Do some research genius.. before talking out of your keyster and shooting your mouth off with another insulting comment.. when you have investors lining up out the door it takes an incredible amount of the burden off of any outstanding debt... the Cubs had a substantial roster of investors in 2009... you can imagine what it is now... its Economics 101

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 11:42 AM) Huh? That just means it doesn't go to probate court. If Reinsdorf dies, you can be certain that his heirs will be getting a call from the IRS, because his estate has to be well over the exemption amount. Also, capital gains tax would not occur for his heirs unless/until they sold the team, at which point, they would be able to claim their stepped up basis against the sale price. From the Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2013 The team's value has increased so much that any sale would trigger hundreds of millions of dollars in capital gains or estate taxes. Experts said Reinsdorf, who practiced tax law before moving into sports, likely has taken steps to minimize future tax bills by moving at least some of his sports holdings into trusts, a common practice among the wealthy. The McCaskeys and the Wirtzes, who own the Bears and the Blackhawks, respectively, did so decades ago, according to court records. If JR's heirs hold on to the estate, the tax burden would be a fraction of what it would be if they sold outright

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 11:42 AM) Huh? That just means it doesn't go to probate court. If Reinsdorf dies, you can be certain that his heirs will be getting a call from the IRS, because his estate has to be well over the exemption amount. Also, capital gains tax would not occur for his heirs unless/until they sold the team, at which point, they would be able to claim their stepped up basis against the sale price. From the Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2013 The team's value has increased so much that any sale would trigger hundreds of millions of dollars in capital gains or estate taxes. Experts said Reinsdorf, who practiced tax law before moving into sports, likely has taken steps to minimize future tax bills by moving at least some of his sports holdings into trusts, a common practice among the wealthy. The McCaskeys and the Wirtzes, who own the Bears and the Blackhawks, respectively, did so decades ago, according to court records. If JR's heirs hold on to the estate, the tax burden would be a fraction of what it would be if they sold outright

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 2, 2016 -> 02:15 PM) In terms of revenue, yes. But the Cubs have a ton of structured debt from their purchase by the Ricketts. Ricketts is an investment banker specializing in debt management. I'm pretty sure he has things under control The Tribune sold for under $1 billion. Of that, $625 M or so was incurred debt. He had investors jumping on board in 2009. If the debt was a ever a problem they would never have been able to maintain an upper tier payroll

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 06:57 AM) I hate the Ricketts, but they did everything right from an ownership perspective. Jerry Reinsdorf and his partners should be absolutely embarrassed that a new ownership group was able to come in, blow everything up, and win a championship so quickly. And yes, I'm aware the Cubs are a completely different animal than the White Sox, but the point here is that Tom hired the smartest baseball guy he could and gave him complete control of the organization. He didn't meddle in the club's direction and say rebuildings are off limit and he didn't force Theo to keep a bunch of people in the organization because of loyalty. I'm not a classic Reinsdorf hater by any means, but he is the single biggest culprit for our recent struggles. His will to win but refusal to back it up with the financial means necessary is a huge problem, resulting in half-ass offseasons that find us routinely coming up short of the underlying goal. More troubling is his unwavering loyalty, which has created an organization filled with group think and a complete lack of accountability. I say this all the time, but the fact that Buddy Bell is still around, let alone has been promoted to assistant GM position is clear evidence of this problem. Unfortunately, it's hard to be optimistic of this organization at the moment. It definitely feels like it's time for a new ownergroup come in and completely clean house. Short of that, hopefully Reinsdorf sees what the Cubs accomplished and finally allows for a rebuild. I know it will be painful for all of us, but I don't think there's an alternative. Another half-ass offseason without clear direction and execution could have grave consequences for us. Great post. Nailed it.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 12:15 AM) The heirs would effectively pay capital gains and an estate tax either way I think. The JR estate is no doubt in trust, which means capital gains or estate taxes do not apply

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 12:58 PM) * As do the responses. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 01:01 PM) Including yours. The most predictable post in Soxtalk history. Thank you, DA

QUOTE (The Mighty Mite @ Oct 29, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) The attendance battle was about even and after we won the division in 83 the Sox were talk of the town while Lee Elia threw a tantrum against Cub fans. We lost Harry Caray in 82 and the Tribune bought the Cubs, when they won the division in 84, again things changed and this time for good. One important factor in the turnaround was the demographic change. Lakeview and Wrigleyview were really starting to get hot in the mid 80's.. I lived not too far from Wrigley in the mid 80's, and in a matter of a year or two, the area became the new "go to"... before that, anything north of Belmont was no man's land..

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 28, 2016 -> 07:19 AM) Wow, this might be the most impressive and irrelevant meltdown I have ever seen. You managed to invoke the holocaust into a discussion about baseball fans in Chicago. Nice exploitation. similar to how you invoked slavery into a baseball discussion?

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 28, 2016 -> 09:55 AM) I'm glad we could all finally come to grips that old people don't matter. or anything old .. for that matter.... just think of the Billions of $$$ that could be saved with the elimination of history curriculums in HS's and Universities across the nation.. not to mention literature, philosophy, law, classical music, opera, architecture, design studies, etc...

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Oct 28, 2016 -> 12:02 AM) Yes, the fan base that has only witnessed 9 trips to the postseason in 116 years of its existence. That fan base. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2016 -> 01:35 PM) * Realistically, less than half of that 116 years is even relevant anymore. If you want to make an honest assessment of the situation, you probably narrow your search and should consider the people who are actually alive today. That means you have an entire generation of people who are 30 and younger who have never seen the White Sox as the #1 team in this town. So while it looks imposing to quote the 1920's, 30's and 40's and even the 50's, as somehow important to today, it isn't. You have to be pushing the mid 60's years old to even remember a game played in the 1950's. Quoting the 1920's as relevant here is like saying that the Republicans voted for the repeal of slavery, as if it is relevant to 2016. It isn't. Chicago is a Cubs town, and pretty solidly has been since the 1950's and early 1960's. Thad, you might need to adjust your statement, to..."the fan base that witnessed 4 trips to the post season in 31 yrs" ..because nothing pre-1985 matters in relation to looking back at how the Cub vs Sox dynamic actually works In the future please disregard any reference to a period of two decades of winning baseball in the last half of the 20th century on the South Side, and how it lead to the Cubs being an afterthought in this town Also disregard 80% of the films and TV shows produced in the last century. Not important. Most people alive today don't care goes for music too. Beatles, Stones, Elvis, David Bowie, Pink Floyd, The Who, Zeppelin, Muddy Waters, Aretha Franklin, Marvin Gaye, James Brown. Most people alive today weren't around when these artists were in their heyday And while you're at it, disregard the majority of events, (and whether any lessons can be learned from them) centered around WWII, the Holocaust, Nuclear War, Space Exploration, Medical Advances, Civil Rights, Womens Rights, the environment, the judicial system, energy, and the economy, that occurred pre-1980, because most people that are alive today weren't around then... Do you see how that works?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 27, 2016 -> 04:49 PM) Well there you go. You finally acknowledged that you are just ignoring the facts here. At least I got that far. My work here is done. I acknowledged your "fact" and stated it was irrelevant in the big picture of things .. And of course you blew that off This is getting a little scary. And a complete waste of my time. See ya

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 27, 2016 -> 04:10 PM) The only fatal flaw is not being able to get past your biases to actually understand and comprehend what I actually said. I get it son, you're not that hard to figure out.. you have a pretty clear agenda.. We are talking about 3 full generations of Sox fans who haven't seen the Sox as the #1 team in this town. That's what you said.. as clear as day... and to that I say.. SO WHAT? It all comes down to you trying to bolster your argument that the Sox are a small market team in a big city, predisposed to not have the budget and resources to put a consistent winner on the field.. because of their "historical" legacy of being the #2 team behind the Cubs... But as I and others have pointed out, historically. that hasn't been the case.

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 26, 2016 -> 10:25 AM) Wasn't it around five or six years ago the TV showed all the empty bleacher seats at Wrigley because fans were upset and staying away? And to the main point, it could have happened 100 years ago...doesn't matter...the statement that Chicago has always been a Cubs town is historical wrong. Mark I was given practically free tickets to a game at Wrigley for a family outing in 2014 .. it was a group of 8 and we paid pennies for tix... the sea of green and empty seats around us was vast.. and this was not too far back from the home team dugout..