Jump to content

6/5- Sox at Twins doubleheader, 3:10


flavum
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, fathom said:

Over last three years for Giolito, it's been one excuse after another to explain the drastic loss of stuff. Mechanics, spin rate, weather, etc.

Fans of the rebuild will give EVERY benefit of the doubt to the guys we've acquired in trades. That is part of how great it is to be a GM doing a complete rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, greg775 said:

Fans of the rebuild will give EVERY benefit of the doubt to the guys we've acquired in trades. That is part of how great it is to be a GM doing a complete rebuild.

Have you ever considered that some of us want to watch the Sox because its something that gives us enjoyment, and that assuming the worst and saying everyone sucks and that there's no real hope we can get better saps us of why we even bother to watch? To that end, there's absolutely no reason not to give some of these guys a chance. It may pay off with someone like Covey. It's absolutely tiring reading people like you that want to win now - the same people you want to build a contender are the same guys that have never proven they can do so - why do you suddenly trust they can spend money wisely now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Heads22 said:

Have you ever considered that some of us want to watch the Sox because its something that gives us enjoyment, and that assuming the worst and saying everyone sucks and that there's no real hope we can get better saps us of why we even bother to watch? To that end, there's absolutely no reason to give these guys a chance. It may pay off with someone like Covey. It's absolutely tiring reading people like you that want to win now - the same people you want to build a contender are the same guys that have never proven they can do so - why do you suddenly trust they can spend money wisely now?

I can root for Gio. Hope he makes it. He had a nice step one tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Heads22 said:

Have you ever considered that some of us want to watch the Sox because its something that gives us enjoyment, and that assuming the worst and saying everyone sucks and that there's no real hope we can get better saps us of why we even bother to watch? To that end, there's absolutely no reason not to give some of these guys a chance. It may pay off with someone like Covey. It's absolutely tiring reading people like you that want to win now - the same people you want to build a contender are the same guys that have never proven they can do so - why do you suddenly trust they can spend money wisely now?

Some good points and that's the dilemma for a lot of Sox fans, they understand that the folks who drove the franchise into a ditch are the ones being asked to tow it out and get it going again. From spending money, to drafting, to signing free agents, its all a big question mark with this front office.

All you can do is hope for the best I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Some good points and that's the dilemma for a lot of Sox fans, they understand that the folks who drove the franchise into a ditch are the ones being asked to tow it out and get it going again. From spending money, to drafting, to signing free agents, its all a big question mark with this front office.

All you can do is hope for the best I guess. 

I was talking with some UK friends about competitiveness in sports. They couldnt understand the tanking idea. I explained the benefits while agreeing its bad for the sport. We were trying to come up with a way to discourage this practice for the benefit of the sport albeit while heavily imbibing. Taking the idea of lower division in soccer, what if teams that lose more than 90 games lose any monetary compensation from the league but retain the player and draft advantages. This way they can still rebuild but it will discourage being truly awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I was talking with some UK friends about competitiveness in sports. They couldnt understand the tanking idea. I explained the benefits while agreeing its bad for the sport. We were trying to come up with a way to discourage this practice for the benefit of the sport albeit while heavily imbibing. Taking the idea of lower division in soccer, what if teams that lose more than 90 games lose any monetary compensation from the league but retain the player and draft advantages. This way they can still rebuild but it will discourage being truly awful.

What?  Stop giving bad teams TV money?  Pretty tough to enforce.

The only way to stop tanking is to subject trades to a Commish-enforced rule about trades having to be in the best interests of the game, or words to that effect.  Ain't gonna happen.  No way was the Stanton trade in best interests of baseball.  Sale trade, too, for that matter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, oldsox said:

What?  Stop giving bad teams TV money?  Pretty tough to enforce.

The only way to stop tanking is to subject trades to a Commish-enforced rule about trades having to be in the best interests of the game, or words to that effect.  Ain't gonna happen.  No way was the Stanton trade in best interests of baseball.  Sale trade, too, for that matter.

 

Maybe if you take away the $35-45 million the White Sox have been getting from 2016 - present for generating such low attendance/gate revenue?   (Either way you penalize someone, it’s going to be disproportionately more (or less) of an impact for mid-market vs. large/r market teams.

 

Now, as far as what’s “IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF BASEBALL.”

Well, you can argue that MLB is more successful financially (ratings/sponsorships) when the Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs, Red Sox, etc., are in the World Series or at least the ALCS/NLCS.   (You might even argue baseball would be better off having the Yankees and Red Sox in separate divisions or leagues, but that’s an argument for another day, like the DH).

It’s the same argument going on currently about the NBA, with even this year’s obvious mismatch basically drawing the same ratings/market share as the 2017 beatdown in 5 games.

People love to watch historic franchises, superstars and/or budding dynasties.

Even teams like the Giants and Cardinals, certainly the Astros or Royals...just don’t register on a national basis.  They’re regional alliances...whereas the four I listed are all “nationalized” fanbases.   I bet only about 3-5% of baseball fans could even name the 2005 White Sox as the World Series champions that particular year.

Finally, you MIGHT be able to argue for the Angels being #5 now that they have Ohtani and Trout, but those two superstars might be enough to have pushed them over into this special status.

 

 

I do think if you started pulling revenue/tv/gate revenue sharing, you’d see franchise like the A’s, Rays, Marlins and potentially Pittsburgh (under present ownership) forced to either move to other markets or sell to deeper-pocked, more long-term oriented ownership groups.   Manfred has already been pushing for at least one team in Mexico and going back to Canada (Montreal, probably).

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, oldsox said:

What?  Stop giving bad teams TV money?  Pretty tough to enforce.

The only way to stop tanking is to subject trades to a Commish-enforced rule about trades having to be in the best interests of the game, or words to that effect.  Ain't gonna happen.  No way was the Stanton trade in best interests of baseball.  Sale trade, too, for that matter.

 

Yeah, the TV money would be a little harsh. The trade restriction wouldnt allow the acquisition of a good quantity of young players. Thats why i thought a monetary penalty would disvourage being awful while still allowing teams to rebuild with young players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...