tray

GRF may never see major renovations, but Area 78 is never going to happen. lmao.

If an agreement to extend the current Lease is made, a plan for a major remodeling of the existing park might be pursued. Not sure which plan would be architecturally/structurally/economically feasible, but I am sure there are plenty of ideas out there. I always thought removal of the entire 500 level would not hurt revenue much and then replacing seating capacity with upper tanks in the outfield w/Palladian arched openings on the back walls like Comiskey had. Maybe make the center field monitor a regular rectangle with metal arch or analog clock above. Anyway, I am sure there are a lot of ideas out there that would cost a lot less and be done several years before entering into a complicated deal to develop the black hole known as Area 78. I'd bet the bank that thing is never going to go.

A Bellinger signing would be incredible for the Sox.

If greed was not a factor by owners/developers and the City, I think a nice 9 hole golf course, outdoor running track, and a park with an outdoor skating rink would be the highest and best use. That would add green space and beautify the city-scape. This parcel is a no-go for any major development otherwise. Too many issues with it that have caused other proposals (including a recent very ambitious one) to fail. There must be other options for a location that are way less problematic. Why go out and look for major problems? Jerry is way too smart to get involved in that century old Area 78 nightmare.

I am always among the last to gather facts and formulate opinions.

"After the crooked river canal was filled and what is now known as the Rezko property was born, the land was used as a train yard and entry point for Grand Central until the 1970’s. When the yard was demolished, no one bothered to hook up sewer or water pipes or run electricity to the property, or even build streets or sidewalks to the lot. Located 30 feet below Roosevelt Road, the property is practically inaccessible from three sides—and, if anyone wanted to build on it, they’d first have to invest significantly in preliminary infrastructure as well as clean up all the garbage and chemicals in the soil. This is partially why Rezko failed to do anything with the land—besides having to deal instead with his money laundering and fraud convictions, of course." https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/august-2013/rezkos-lot/

I am concerned that speculation about the possibility of a new stadium is going to hurt the franchise if/when it proves to be just that, or appears to be something intended primarily for leverage with ISFA. The Sox should get on with this or make another plan in order to clarify a way forward as soon as possible. Acquire the parcel, seek pubic/private financing, obtain a few conceptual plans, address site issues. JR is the right person to make this happen, if he wants it to.

I an not a geologist or land engineer but simply am noting the history of the site. You truck in all the solid fill you want but the original river bed may compromise soil bearing. We also do not know what kind of fill was used there. Once again, even without knowing some of these answers, the fact that the parcel has not been developed since 1929 should be cause for some trepidation about this site. I would pass on it and look for other alternatives, especially closer to the lakefront by Burnham Harbor. One issue with difficult sites like this is that you just cannot accurately quantify prices until the shovels go down in the soil.

Builder who has been involved with land development, including sites in Chicago that had numerous soil issues.

There are major reasons the site has not been developed since the river was moved....in 1929. The reason this rando brought it up here because no one else did. Time and costs for developing this site would be major considerations for the Sox if they want to make a move by 2029.

The location has to be adjacent to Burnham Harbor somewhere with great views of the Lakefront if the Sox want to accomplish something like that.

Having researched the history of this parcel as a river that moved was later used as a landfill, I had simply pointed out the obvious - that there will be major costs associated with excavating, filling and underpinning buildings and flat work there. Look at some of the historic pictures of the river there. Those costs could be prohibitive given the fact that the entire site was crossed North to South by the Chicago river and then filled in with who knows what. It could take years and millions of dollars to dig out the prior landfill, truck in solid fill, and drive pylons to support a stadium, a river wall, etc. once EPA approvals have been made and architectural and engineering plans have been approved. This seems like a no-go if the idea is to replace GRF by 2029.

If I am looking at the same strip of land I wonder if perhaps that acreage would present load bearing issues at certain points and/or require removal of non-load bearing fill and/or contaminated soil. Looking at a historical map from the straightening of the Chicago river back in the 1920's (see link below) , I have to wonder how deep the old river bed was, how much muck and fill would need to be hauled away and how many piles would have to be driven in order to support structures and even flat work. The cost for extensive land engineering, excavation, fill, pylons, etc. could well be a reason why that site has remained undeveloped for decades. https://chicagology.com/harbor/straighteningriver/

I dislike the 78 site. It's a dump. All the railroad tracks converging there and the quality of the river at that point. It's awful. And really no special views of the lake or the loop that warrant moving there. Sox are sitting on a goldmine as it is as with all of the existing parking and infrastructure and with Bridgeport and Bronzeville continuing to gentrify year after year. They don't need a new stadium and if and when they do, just build on the site of the original Comiskey.

Congratulations to this young man who is a good role model for young people who may think they have limitations to their career paths for any reason.Having said that and with all due respect for him, I thought it was time to move on, even prior to any reported contractual issues. IMO, it would also be a good idea to start phasing Stone out. As a long time Sox fan it seems like our play-by-play and color commentators should have some sort of chemistry. When you start off with Stone as a given, the selection becomes limited and perhaps that decision has to essentially be ceded to Stone. I have always thought Stone would be happier as a Cubs announcer. He has been trending toward too much sarcasm and I for one, have often disagreed with his take on several players, coaches, etc. I know that is part of his job, but again, maybe a fresh perspective on everything is now in order.

I'd bring him back unless there was some Chris Sale like issue we don't know about where he revolted against the team and management. You can't form opinions about players based on things you just assume about them. Many of these players , even the best ones like Robert Jr., might not be people you might consider as friendly, etc. As I recall,TA spent time mentoring kids in the ACE program and appeared to like Chicago and all Sox fans. Obviously he had some personal issues and injury issues but he's a human being for C Sakes.

Makes sense in every way. My hope is that Getz gets passed his proclivity for Royals though.

Long forgotten by some, a young twenty-something Terry Savarise was tasked by Reinsdorf and Einhorn to travel to every major league stadium to glean ideas for the new park. He came back impressed by Dodgers Stadium's open outfield design and color scheme - powder blue and white with an open bowl design. He knew nothing about architecture or sport stadium architecture, Chicago architecture or the history of the architecture of Comiskey and Wrigley. His monumental mistakes cost the franchise hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to remedy. Next time a major renovation or new park is considered, Sox ownership should seek advice from Chicago architects and Sox fans in addition to the arch. group that designs sports stadiums. They also should look into acquiring land near the lakefront or even Soldier Field if the Bears move.

Cubs want Bellinger. At least get into negotiations and bid the salary up. As I stated, I know that realistically this is not going to happen but thinking outside the box (can we do that here without getting stoned?) an outfield of Bennintendi, Robert and Bellinger would be above average and possibly way above average. Bellinger still looks like he is in good shape physically, is a good outfielder, and can produce 15+ home runs. Kind of exactly what the Sox need to move the team toward being competitive and win back some fans.

It would be big news in this town if the Sox signed Bellinger. Yes, I know they won't, but it would be big news on both sides of town.

Add to that (ugly 19 game blown lead stat) several games the we may have come back if our bullpen just kept games close and tie games. Hahn tried to bolster the end of the bullpen with guys who seriously unperformed. In many games it was frustrating that Bummer and a few others could not throw strikes when they needed, allowed walked hitters to steal bases, all resulting in crushing late inning rallies. When a team loses a lot of close games in late innings, it is hard to build any sort of momentum. Please no more lead off walks with a one run lead followed with the guy stealing second. You do that, you are almost handing the game to the other team.

Ideally the back of the bullpen should have a strong Closer coupled with high leverage LH and RH pitchers as needed for the 7th and 8th. My own choice for Closer as it stands would be Kopech but I have never heard him indicate he would consider that, even for more money. Then Greg Santos (RH) and Garrett Crochet (LH) as our last line of defense in the 7th and 8th. As memory serves, in 2023, one of the worst things about the team was giving up the ghost late in games. Even when a starter got shelled early, many times our much maligned offense came back only to see leads floundered by our bullpen, walking lead-off hitters with one run leads and getting pulled after 3 batters after they could not retire the side. All-in-all, I am not sure I want to see the Sox trade Cease. In order to even be respectable Sox need at least 3 decent TOR starters (perhaps one or two Aces or stoppers) and a well constructed bullpen. Offense is a bit far away, but not that far away to grab some wins with bloops from little guys and blasts from big guys, IMO.

So acquire position players that marginally improve the defense in order to marginally increase the future trade value of pitchers? Oh, I get it now...and I think it is contrived and asinine.

"2. They are seriously about defense to make all the short term tradable starting pitching assets look as good as possible." It is axiomatic that pitching is the first line of defense in mlb. Rhetorically, what purpose would it serve to have multiple gold glove level defenders signed primarily to have them shag baseballs hit off an inferior pitching staff ? IMO, Sox have incrementally improved after the subtraction of a few failed starters and relievers. OK, defense wasn't the best but a lot of games were lost last season in late innings by the bullpen. For those of us who watched a lot of games, recall how Sox hitters tried to stage comebacks in certain games only to see our relievers fail to hold leads over and again. A team can win a lot with great pitching, average defensive players, and some timely hitting which, to me anyway, has to include a lot of home runs. HR should be a priority, otherwise we will end up with a team that not only loses a lot, but is painfully boring to watch.

Counterpoints well taken. I didn't realize that AB had never played RF in the majors. Christ. What a great acquisition for 50 Million, a Left Fielder with almost no power and he is no speed demon out there either.