Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jack Parkman

Rumor: Reinsdorf aims to build second place teams

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, soxfan49 said:

 

Not that Stone’s tweet changes anything, but David Sampson is a true scumbag and anyone that would take his word as fact is simply looking for dirt on Jerry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, gusguyman said:

All ya'll may not agree with Stone coming to JRs defense here, but you can't deny it was a sick burn yo.

Any time somebody wants to rip David Sampson or Jeff Loria is fine by me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Black_Jack29 said:

I love Stoney and the way that he was willing to lose his job to call out the Cubs for tanking down the stretch back on ‘03 (?). But it’s pretty well understood that if you want to keep your job as a Sox announcer, you need to run interference for JR. So I’m not sure what to think of his comments.

This idea that it somehow works in the owners favor to finish second rather than first is nuts.  Do you really think a 2nd place team is more valuable than a perennial contender?  Value would be determined by many things.  Bottom line profit, size of market place, attendance and merchandise sales among them.  Full park and robust merchandise sales would attract the most potential buyers at the highest sales price IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, poppysox said:

This idea that it somehow works in the owners favor to finish second rather than first is nuts.  Do you really think a 2nd place team is more valuable than a perennial contender?  Value would be determined by many things.  Bottom line profit, size of market place, attendance and merchandise sales among them.  Full park and robust merchandise sales would attract the most potential buyers at the highest sales price IMO.

Not necessarily. If you have to spend yourself into debt to finish in first place, second place is obviously more valuable from a long-term financial perspective. And if you want to go nuts and hand out a Machado-like contract, it’ll lower the value of your franchise if you’re looking to sell.

Like I’ve said a few times in this god forsaken thread, I don’t believe that JR is attempting to come in second place to maximize profit, but I do believe that he’s risk-averse and prioritizes long-term financial stability over all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Black_Jack29 said:

Not necessarily. If you have to spend yourself into debt to finish in first place, second place is obviously more valuable from a long-term financial perspective. And if you want to go nuts and hand out a Machado-like contract, it’ll lower the value of your franchise if you’re looking to sell.

Like I’ve said a few times in this god forsaken thread, I don’t believe that JR is attempting to come in second place to maximize profit, but I do believe that he’s risk-averse and prioritizes long-term financial stability over all.

Absolutely.  That’s all that matters and there’s nothing wrong with it. 

Reading any more into it than that is crazy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

How do they quantify or measure that?  In a superficial, sourcing way...Alex Ramirez, Abreu, Tatis, Jr., and Luis Robert would stack up against any organization over a ten year period.

Of course, crediting JR, KW, Hahn or Paddy is the trickiest part there.

And Robert is the only one to spend significant time in our system.  And there’s  a huge gap from those four to Mickey Adolfo.  

I understand many do not think it’s fair to categorize the Cuban/NPB exports differently in operations as they are functionally the same group, and I get it. But the Sox clearly prefer the “less risky” older players from professional leagues than the signings of the 16-18 year olds I am typically speaking about with the international signings.

But the Sox have done basically nothing from the latter for quite a while and my take is that they have a CW in the building that those players are too “risky” and don’t want to justify spending millions on a group of 16 year olds when 80% wont make it out of Aball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

Absolutely.  That’s all that matters and there’s nothing wrong with it. 

Reading any more into it than that is crazy.  

We’re basically a much less successful version of the Twins, minus the Mauer contract weighing down the franchise for a half-decade.  And that deal likely would have been avoided were he not a “hometown hero.”

But even the Twins aren’t afraid to change managers or GM’s.

Share this post


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

I understand many do not think it’s fair to categorize the Cuban/NPB exports differently in operations as they are functionally the same group, and I get it. But the Sox clearly prefer the “less risky” older players from professional leagues than the signings of the 16-18 year olds I am typically speaking about with the international signings.

But the Sox have done basically nothing from the latter for quite a while and my take is that they have a CW in the building that those players are too “risky” and don’t want to justify spending millions on a group of 16 year olds when 80% wont make it out of Aball.

Surely someone has at least tracked the Top 30 intl. players over the last decade plus, their signing bonuses and total return on investment.  Even hitting on just one (Tatis) for under $1 million in terms of the future fWAR created on a 6-7 year contract, it really doesn’t take more than a couple successes to easily pay for itself.

It’s just infuriating when you look back on how much money has been spent unsuccessfully on Tier B/C/D Free Agent talent since 2002-2003, compared to pretty much every other organization in baseball.  (2004-2005 being the lone exception, obviously.)

I don’t even know the cause...maybe the Borchard and Viciedo contracts, but it’s not like they invested $100’s of millions like the long-term Cabrera or Pujols deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Surely someone has at least tracked the Top 30 intl. players over the last decade plus, their signing bonuses and total return on investment.  Even hitting on just one (Tatis) for under $1 million in terms of the future fWAR created on a 6-7 year contract, it really doesn’t take more than a couple successes to easily pay for itself.

It’s just infuriating when you look back on how much money has been spent unsuccessfully on Tier B/C/D Free Agent talent since 2002-2003, compared to pretty much every other organization in baseball.  (2004-2005 being the lone exception, obviously.)

I don’t even know the cause...maybe the Borchard and Viciedo contracts, but it’s not like they invested $100’s of millions like the long-term Cabrera or Pujols deals.

Joe Borchard was a draft pick, what does he have to do with any of this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ottawa_sox said:

 

I was 8 in '59.  Through rose coloured childhood glasses it certainly was frustrating, mainly because they pulled it off in '59.  And they had a true home field advantage.  Long, wet infield grass,  great starting ground ball pitchers, incentivized by 20 ground ball out suits (at least for 1/2 year until they were awarded too many).  Expansive outfield manned by speedy outfielders.  And could those Sox ever bunt (oh for the goodle days!!!!).  No such thing as blowouts.  They were built to win close games.  

I still tend to have unrealistic expectations, each year, come day 1.  Child indoctrination will do that.

Thanks for the wonderful feedback from you and NWINFan...It seems like those teams would have had a terrific opportunity for multiple World Series appearances and possible victories if there was the expanded playoffs that we have today.  Teams with terrific pitching and defense might have had a shot once they got to the postseason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Joe Borchard was a draft pick, what does he have to do with any of this? 

Maybe he's talking about the Borchard signing bonus, which at the time was a record. It was $5.3M. Cheap ass Jerry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TaylorStSox said:

Aside from being in the AL, I can't think of one thing the Sox and Twins have in common. 

Other than they are division rivals, usually spend arpind  the same resources and one team seems far more successful than the other. If the Twins can be good, why can't the White Sox?  I'm sure you have a fine excuse. 

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


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

Other than they are division rivals, usually have the same resources and one team seems far more successful than the other. If the Twins can be good, why can't the White Sox? I'm sure you have a fine excuse. 

Because they're a better franchise?

 

I'm not even sure what the last sentence means. Since I don't spend my free time crying on the internet about things I can't change, I can't be objective? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Twins are too risk averse. They operate as a high floor/low ceiling franchise. That's why they're never an actual threat in the playoffs. They're just outclassed. 

Edited by TaylorStSox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

The Twins are too risk averse. They operate as a high floor/low ceiling franchise. That's why they're never an actual threat in the playoffs. They're just outclassed. 

Yet they have twice as many World Series wins than the White Sox since JR owned the team. 

The White Sox have won a postseason series 1 year in all of our lifetimes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Samson is a piece of crap but i wouldn't shoot the messenger in this case. There isn't a doubt in my mind that Reinsdorf told Samson that. He apparently told Jack McDowell the same thing. 670 talked about it this morning in the 5 at 5. They're trying to get Jack McDowell on. Reinsdorf didn't deny any of it either. I hope this blows up this week. The only reason Reinsdorf responded in the first place is because Scott Reifert received tons of e-mails from pissed off fans after the audio leaked. The PR machine is in total spin control right now. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Yet they have twice as many World Series wins than the White Sox since JR owned the team. 

The White Sox have won a postseason series 1 year in all of our lifetimes. 

The Twins last won the world series 29 years ago. I'm not sure how that's relevant, but whatever. You're not even making sense this morning, grumpy cat. 

Share this post


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

The Twins last won the world series 29 years ago. I'm not sure how that's relevant, but whatever. You're not even making sense this morning, grumpy cat. 

You don't make sense. The White Sox with their built in advantage of being in Chicago have pissed it away and cannot match the Minnesota Twins. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

You don't make sense. The White Sox with their built in advantage of being in Chicago have pissed it away and cannot match the Minnesota Twins. 

When did I ever they didn't. In this thread I've said: 1. The Sox and Twins have nothing in common. 2. The Twins are a better franchise.

What in the hell are you even talking about? 

Share this post


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

When did I ever they didn't. In this thread I've said: 1. The Sox and Twins have nothing in common. 2. The Twins are a better franchise.

What in the hell are you even talking about? 

 They have a lot in common. You are as wrong here as you were about Adrian Beltre. 

Share this post


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

 They have a lot in common. You are as wrong here as you were about Adrian Beltre. 

What are you talking about? This is the weirdest exchange. 

 

Let's start from the beginning. Caufield went on some Caufield rant about how the Twins are like the Sox except for, mostly drivel I didn't bother reading... Because Caufield. I said they don't have anything in common... Because, well, they don't. Totally different philosophies. Then you start making weird projections about things I never said. Are you drunk? It's early man. 

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×