Jump to content
whitesoxwinner

Water carrying from the white sox community

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, elrockinMT said:

I think the Sox had a good and well thought out offer. Ten year deals seem to fizzle out after about Year six it seems. Folks talk about the team not matching or paying out the market value for Machado. But really what is market value for any player? Is it set by the player or the teams bidding? We seem to have put money out there. I guess time will tell

Just not as good or well thought out as that of the Padres.  The small market San Diego Padres.   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fan O'Faust said:

Just not as good or well thought out as that of the Padres.  The small market San Diego Padres.   

Shouldn't Northwestern, Harvard and Michigan beat out the lowliest of the Ivies, and a humanities school at that?

Maybe we need to send Hahn back to school for another degree, since Daniels and Preller both went to Cornell and have been much more successful in either scouting/talent evaluation OR getting their organizations to the playoffs.

 

Preller grew up on Long Island, New York, and went to school in South Huntington, New York, where in 1995 he graduated from Walt Whitman High School.[2] He attended Cornell University, where he met Jon Daniels,[3][4] and graduated summa cum laude with a B.S. degree in 1999.[5] After graduation, he served as an intern with the Philadelphia Phillies before joining the front office of the Los Angeles Dodgers, and also worked for Major League Baseball.[6]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, caulfield12 said:

Maybe you can nominate it for the Pulitzer...?

Sure thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, elrockinMT said:

I think the Sox had a good and well thought out offer. Ten year deals seem to fizzle out after about Year six it seems. Folks talk about the team not matching or paying out the market value for Machado. But really what is market value for any player? Is it set by the player or the teams bidding? We seem to have put money out there. I guess time will tell

Time has already told.  The market is set by how talented the player is and what teams are willing to pay for them.  The $300 million mark isn’t anything new for premium young talent.  Stanton set the mark not too long ago.  If anyone is deserving of $300 million guaranteed, it would be the two 26 year old future Hall of Famers that were available this offseason.  And if you aren’t offering 10 years then you aren’t getting the player, so how is that well thought out?  It’s well thought out for the team’s advantage maybe but that won’t get the player signed.  Hahn and the Sox either needs to be prepared to pay the market rate or stay in the kiddie pool with the rest of the non-spenders.

Edited by Harper2Sox
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, iamshack said:

It is a shame that our reporters fear for their job too much to write objective articles. This isn’t the case in many other large markets. 

OTOH, I personally don’t think we see the full puzzle quite yet. 

Have you seen what the job market for journalism looks like today? I don't think many guys want to tell their bosses they can't do their job. 

Hell, no matter what I think of my employer you won't see me setting fire to that bridge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Have you seen what the job market for journalism looks like today? I don't think many guys want to tell their bosses they can't do their job. 

Hell, no matter what I think of my employer you won't see me setting fire to that bridge. 

Oh I get it, but in my mind if you can't ask the tough questions you can't do your job either. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Teams shouldn't be allowed to control the media like that. It is a mockery of the journalist, IMO. He's there to ask the tough questions for the fans, not to sell you tickets. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Oh I get it, but in my mind if you can't ask the tough questions you can't do your job either. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Teams shouldn't be allowed to control the media like that. It is a mockery of the journalist, IMO. He's there to ask the tough questions for the fans, not to sell you tickets. 

It is much easier to tell other people how to do their jobs when there aren't any consequences for yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

It is much easier to tell other people how to do their jobs when there aren't any consequences for yourself. 

I agreed with you, but the journalist isn't doing their job if they don't ask the tough questions either. That is why I said damned if you do, damned if you don't. They don't have to bludgeon people with tough questions, but it is their job to ask them when the team made a poor decision. You occasionally need Danny Parkins to interrogate John Paxon. You don't need to do it all of the time, but on occasion it is warranted. Parkins interviewing Paxon was a breath of fresh air. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like Sullivan’s article has people brushing over all Sox beat writers. One, he isn’t really the Sox trib beat writer, he’ll do columns and profiles and fill in. Two, Sunday trib was very critical of Sox. I don’t feel like DVS I’m sun times has been carrying water either. And Fegans post machado article was great. 

I know chucks sunshine Schtick isn’t fun right now, but whatever, that’s not the show he has created. And I don’t think it needs to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I agreed with you, but the journalist isn't doing their job if they don't ask the tough questions either. That is why I said damned if you do, damned if you don't. They don't have to bludgeon people with tough questions, but it is their job to ask them when the team made a poor decision. You occasionally need Danny Parkins to interrogate John Paxon. You don't need to do it all of the time, but on occasion it is warranted. Parkins interviewing Paxon was a breath of fresh air. 

Great point, and Parkins kept his job.  And after Lawrence Holmes and his softball interview with Hahn, who would you rather have interviewing Chicago GMs regarding their poor decisions?  Parkins is the man.

Edited by Harper2Sox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harper2Sox said:

Great point, and Parkins kept his job.  And after Lawrence Holmes and his softball interview with Hahn, who would you rather have interviewing Chicago GMs regarding their poor decisions?

What SS2k5's point is, is that Paxon is unlikely to go on their show again. If that is the case, Parkins should call him out on it and tell the fans he's being a little b****. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I agreed with you, but the journalist isn't doing their job if they don't ask the tough questions either. That is why I said damned if you do, damned if you don't. They don't have to bludgeon people with tough questions, but it is their job to ask them when the team made a poor decision. You occasionally need Danny Parkins to interrogate John Paxon. You don't need to do it all of the time, but on occasion it is warranted. Parkins interviewing Paxon was a breath of fresh air. 

Their job is what their bosses tell them it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Their job is what their bosses tell them it is. 

That sir, is why I have trouble keeping a job. I can't stfu about things I disagree with. My personal integrity means more to me than any job. If my boss and I aren't on the same page, he's going to hear about it. If I were a journalist and I couldn't ask a critical question of someone I'm interviewing, that I thought my readers needed to know, because my boss wants to keep access, I'll let him hear about it and if he doesn't agree, then my resignation letter is on his desk by the end of the day. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

What SS2k5's point is, is that Paxon is unlikely to go on their show again. If that is the case, Parkins should call him out on it and tell the fans he's being a little b****. 

Well, as a listener I will always remember that Parkins interview over all others in which Paxson is served up questions on a tee to give a bunch of boring clicheed responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan McNeil said the other day that The Sox wouldn't let Hahn go on their show. In my piece, I didn't really criticize the beat writers. They aren't columnists. I think it's weak that they never questioned anyone on the mixed messaging with Hahn/Williams but whatever. One of them was lying, who was it? My issue was mostly with the NBCS Chicago crew. They've been leading the charge on Machado for two years and started dumping on him as soon as he took another offer. That's my biggest issue in all of this. They don't have to criticize the Sox but they shouldn't blatantly lie to try and placate fans either. Hahn and KW lie constantly. It's the media's job to sift through that shit. People don't like him but the world needs more Joe Cowley's for this reason 

Edited by Y2Jimmy0
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Dan McNeil said the other day that The Sox wouldn't let Hahn go on their show. In my piece, I didn't really criticize the beat writers. They aren't columnists. I like it's weak that they never questioned anyone on the mixed messaging with Hahn/Williams but whatever. One of them was lying, who was it? My issue was mostly with the NBCS Chicago crew. They've been leading the charge on Machado for two years and started dumping on him as soon as he took another offer. That's my biggest issue in all of this. They don't have to criticize the Sox but they shouldn't blatantly lie to try and placate fans either. Hahn and KW lie constantly. It's the media's job to sift through that shit. People don't like him but the world needs more Joe Cowley's for this reason 

Yep. I hate to bring politics into this, but it is the media's job to hold the president accountable to the people of this country. It says so in the constitution. You get softball questions, you end up with an incompetent boob or a tyrant in charge. 

(let's keep this discussion related to accountability and the media please) I just used this as an example. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Dan McNeil said the other day that The Sox wouldn't let Hahn go on their show. In my piece, I didn't really criticize the beat writers. They aren't columnists. I like it's weak that they never questioned anyone on the mixed messaging with Hahn/Williams but whatever. One of them was lying, who was it? My issue was mostly with the NBCS Chicago crew. They've been leading the charge on Machado for two years and started dumping on him as soon as he took another offer. That's my biggest issue in all of this. They don't have to criticize the Sox but they shouldn't blatantly lie to try and placate fans either. Hahn and KW lie constantly. It's the media's job to sift through that shit. People don't like him but the world needs more Joe Cowley's for this reason 

Joe Cowley who was run off of the baseball beat because no one would deal with him anymore. Jay Mariotti is pretty much unemployable because of the stunts he pulled. 

You can be that guy, but there are consequences for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Joe Cowley who was run off of the baseball beat because no one would deal with him anymore. Jay Mariotti is pretty much unemployable because of the stunts he pulled. 

You can be that guy, but there are consequences for it.

That is bullshit. He's doing his job properly. There shouldn't be consequences for doing your job properly. My job is to do what the job description says. My job isn't to stroke someone's ego. If you want me to stroke your ego, fuck off. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

That is bullshit. He's doing his job properly. There shouldn't be consequences for doing your job properly. My job is to do what the job description says. My job isn't to stroke someone's ego. If you want me to stroke your ego, fuck off. 

His bosses felt differently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

His bosses felt differently. 

In my personal opinion, doing your job properly and stroking anyone's ego are mutually exclusive. It doesn't matter what job or what profession. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jack Parkman said:

In my personal opinion, doing your job properly and stroking anyone's ego are mutually exclusive. 

I don't decide what my job is. My bosses do. This is true for everyone who works for someone else. I have two choices, find another job or deal with it. My opinion is meaningless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I don't decide what my job is. My bosses do. This is true for everyone who works for someone else. I have two choices, find another job or deal with it. My opinion is meaningless. 

I couldn't sleep at night if I dealt with it, it would torment me. So therefore, I suffer. 

I won't take a job unless my boss and I are on the same page on what the job duties are. As long as we're on the same page, we're fine. 

It is also why I refuse to work for anyone else anymore. Too many power struggles and clashes. 

I am way too skeptical of business in general to allow someone else to define the difference between right and wrong. Once you allow that, you lead yourself down a slippery slope. 

Edited by Jack Parkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I couldn't sleep at night if I dealt with it, it would torment me. So therefore, I suffer. 

I won't take a job unless my boss and I are on the same page on what the job duties are. As long as we're on the same page, we're fine. 

 

It isn't nearly that serious. Right now I am lucky that I am pretty well off, but in the past it hasn't been that way. You keep perspective and don't give it power over the rest of your life. It wasn't permanent,  and eventually I moved on. I like the paycheck more than not. I definitely like it more than unemployment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×