nrockway

This is my point. Every team will do this from here on out because real estate development is more profitable than owning a baseball team is. I'd like to do more research into this, but I'm sure the Las Vegas A's are planning the same thing. Off hand, the area surrounding their planned suburban site in Paradise, NV looks primed for redevelopment. I wish city and state governments were less lazy and developed the sites themselves If the Sox stay in town, I suspect they will do the same thing to 35th/Shields, Soldier Field, the US Steel South Works site, around the United Center. That will be the reason the Sox stay in town and not move to any other city, that they will be given carte blanche to develop an area because, logically, this is the only way cities can sustain themselves nowadays; property taxes from businesses that serve exclusively yuppies. I personally think it's a poor example of urban planning and I've met some of the bozos who make decisions at DPD and they're definitely on the side of the billionaires and not the constituents that the mayor vests power in them to serve. Not related to this topic, but maybe the city could incentivize high-skilled manufacturing jobs like Germany and Japan do. It's a different mode of tax revenue that actually creates something. I think I could also make the point that this sort of development correlates with increased crime as well. New York was able to effectively neoliberalize the 5 boroughs and push criminal activity to the fringes, to Yonkers, to Newark. Thanks, Rudy. I think there could be a great balance struck between the city and the Sox to develop a site beyond "incentivizing" private interests to do whatever they want just so they can produce tax revenue. I really think a city like Chicago could strongarm these losers to stay in an incredible city, we'll see what the environment looks like in 20 years or whenever Jerry dies and we "need" a new ballpark. I actually am optimistic that the development environment will change by then, insofar as politicians and un-elected administrators might get over the Ronald Reagan brainwashing. I wrote a similarly long response to your post but accidentally closed out of the tab and PHPBBB restored the post I was writing to caulfield and not to you. I want to go to bed so will rewrite it tomorrow; but the gist was more of my perspective on the Ricketts and Lakeview (and how that family didn't kick off the gentrification project but probably should not be allowed to own a historic landmark and develop the neighborhood). and Tom Tunney and zoning laws and how I should probably do a bit more specific research on Bridgeport or "Bronzeville"'s relation to the park. bummer.

In hindsight, it's probably for the best for that area that they didn't create Camden Yards Midwest even if it derives from Reinsdorf being a moron and stuck in the past. I'm very skeptical of this ballpark development model in which they never just build or refurbish a park, they have to derive maximum profit by building an entire district of hotels, bars, restaurants, luxury housing. Is that fun? I guess so. Is it a good thing that urban tax revenue is entirely predicated on yuppy consumption habits and so cities encourage exclusively that sort of development? I don't think so. Personally don't think you can blame Jerry for not gentrifying that area effectively enough. Would local residents have actually desired that accompanying development that would have certainly priced people out of their homes? Is the site at 35th/Shields comparable to Baltimore's Inner Harbor to justify a "work-live-play" district? Perhaps if the team moves to Soldier Field, that makes sense, build all that garbage on Northerly Island. Easier I think to blame M. Daley and Bill Clinton and CHA's "Plan for Transformation" for the state of that area. It demolished thousands of people's homes around there and replaced them with nothing, leaving permanent scars on the landscape and doing untold damage to the city's residents. 30 years later and the gentrification project in Bronzeville is in full swing however, so maybe that sort of development makes sense for the next park (if there will be one). I'd rather there still be an opportunity for the city to coerce the next ownership group to build something actually useful on the Stateway Gardens site, like low-income housing or perhaps a sports complex or otherwise something community facing. I do not lament the fact that Reinsdorf did not use his baseball team to speed up the gentrification process like Ricketts did. That family has a much larger negative impact on the city and on national politics than Reinsdorf.

Tom's father, Joe, founded Ameritrade and is the source of the Ricketts family wealth and is also a pretty massive piece of s%*#. "Destroying" Lakeview is dramatic but it's concerning how much property they have bought up, how they're developing it and frankly that a single family basically owns the entire commercial corridor along Clark. It's basically become a theme park for well-paid young people and businesspeople entertaining their clients. Very little character, lots of drunks, more crime, fewer and fewer families. However, if you like Starbucks there are 6 within walking distance (only 3 Chipotles). The new residential construction facilitates this change because it's more profitable to divide your building into studios and 1-beds than it is to have 3 and 4 bed units. The neighborhood is doomed. https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-cubs-wrigleyville-redevelopment-met-20161023-story.html This article is a pretty good summary. The park itself is more valuable to the owners than the actual team is.

I went to three games this past season, bought two hats, bought an unquantifiable number of beers. I regret not going to more games. The team sux, the owner is an idiot, but it's still a fun day out and very affordable compared to the Cubs or Bulls or Bears. That's one reason I hate the Cubs, the prices are extortionate because they play in a world famous historic landmark, have a national fanbase and are surrounded by yup neighborhoods. it's an elitist team and Ricketts seems more cartoonishly evil than Reinsdorf, Senior is a massive racist and you can watch in real time how that family is destroying Lakeview.

Noelvi Marte (#23), Edwin Arroyo (#57), Levi Stoudt and a fourth guy I've never heard of who probably isn't making the majors. I'd be thrilled with this kind of return for Cease I think. I wouldn't mind STL as a trading partner and a deal centered around Masyn Winn and Tink Hence.

I like Jason but he seems a little bit like a diva and I don’t love that he seemed to prioritize the national gigs over his Sox job. I bet this rubbed the team the wrong way too. Chicago to Detroit seems like a downward move, I doubt he wanted to do this Sad to see him go, I’m mostly entertained by his antics and he has an actually good rapport with Stone. He’s also great filling in for the Bulls, way better than Amin, another “national” non-homer. The next person should be more of a homer, not concerned with pissing off the opponent’s fans or his bosses at Fox. I think from a Sox/Bulls perspective, replacing Hawk and Funk with Benetti and Amin was a mistake. Swapped out two guys who actually liked the team for millennials who treat it like a side job.

this is a dishonest evaluation of how Major League Baseball has been structured for most of its history. it doesn't make your point. personally, I don't want to root for a treadmill team. There's something to be said about watching 100+ Sox games a year and wanting to see your team win in each game, but a championship is the ultimate goal. I still think about 2005. also, it wasn't "slowly expanded", you should reframe your post to be after 1968; a watershed year for many reasons.

I wrote a long post and you picked one offhand remark out of it to reply to instead of the actual post. I'm not going to reply to your post, make a better one next time. I sure as hell didn't read past your second sentence, discuss in good faith if you have something to say. edit 1: I read it. An executive with one Wild Card berth doesn't particularly impress me. You ask who has done better? Rick Hahn has. You want him? Realistically, it's a foolish way to evaluate individuals and baseball teams. The truth is you have no fucking clue how these people will perform in the job. Or maybe you know them personally or worked for them, I dunno. I'd rather just think that the organization has deficiencies that a middle manager can't fix. You've worked for a living, right? Does a brand new C-level executive have the power to transform an organization? Perhaps, but they're limited by their boss. The boss in question is Jerry Reinsdorf. Go Sox! edit 2: you know, I didn't actually read your post.. but now I did. particularly that snide little remark at the end. you make this analogy that I'm a sexist or something, the reality is that you're being a chauvinist by having different standards by which to evaluate men and women on for doing the same job. the reality is, the many many professional women I know would not expect a handout from the likes of you but they might expect equal treatment.

I don't think that person exists, male or female; you also moved the goalposts, Ng did not win two pennants or even get close. and I would stop worshipping Ivy League executives, personally. I think if this team is ever good again in Reinsdorf's lifetime, it's because of good luck. Good luck happens all the time in baseball, thus I'll keep watching. It happens less in basketball and so I've basically tuned out, the Bulls are doomed even though they hired a wunderkind as head executive, the exact kind of guy that Sox fans are clamoring for...he scouted Jokic!! I do think any executive can strike gold, but can they sustain it? Rick Hahn has technically achieved more baseball success. I sort of think you should judge people on their merits, not on their gender or other things they can't control. We should judge the organizations, not the singular person in charge...and that falls on Reinsdorf. Kim Ng deserves to be judged as fairly as any other baseball mind, and her resume is fine, but it doesn't warrant a 10 page thread except that she went to school at UChicago. Honestly, I'd rather take a flyer on a no-name like Getz, the last time Reinsdorf did that he found the best coach a Chicago team has seen in 30 years. That's not a sustainable hiring strategy though, striking gold, but it seems to me that that there are bigger issues than who the middle manager is. Why do you, or anyone else, think that a new middle manager will be able to create entirely new organizational practices? By the way, Mark Cuban is a moron and a meddling loser and lucked into Dirk and Doncic and appears to be spoiling Doncic's career. Mark Cuban is akin to a very dumb forum poster who got very lucky by getting into the dotcom bubble at the right time. I have an uncle who is very wealthy because he realized that asbestos removal was a good business opportunity slightly before the time that University of California was contracting people to remove it from all their campuses. He's the dumbest fucking guy I ever met, I wouldn't trust him to make decisions beyond taking asbestos out of a house and maybe scratching off a lotto ticket. I'm sure he could buy a business he knows nothing about and give orders to competent people he pays, but he's still a dumbass at the end of the day. Back to sports, if you give Cuban credit for 2011, you better give Reinsdorf credit for 2005...dumb fuckin luck and good players overcoming organizational incompetence. It's kinda funny because I've never heard of more sexual harassment/workplace abuse complaints in sports than I have about the Dallas Mavericks. That's what you want for this team? Cuban lucked out again because Doncic was far and away the best player in the draft, scouts thought so, fans knew it, and two even more incompetent organizations picked Ayton and Badley instead of him. No hindsight, Doncic was far and away the best player in that class, certainly not two big men with no skills beyond athleticism. Is that Mark Cuban's legacy? I do believe that the Phoenix Suns and Sacramento Kings are more incompetent organizations than the Mavs or the Chicago White Sox but that's just me.

I don't think that's totally fair. I definitely like the non-chauvinistic atmosphere of this board that doesn't unfairly diminish a woman's accomplishments; at the same time I think fans are exaggerating about how "she's the one that got away." Being more qualified than Getz and having a longer resume isn't in and of itself an accomplishment. The Marlins also barely snuck into a Wild Card spot and were quickly eliminated, that was the only winning season under her leadership. Of course, it's a major step forward for the sport that she earned that job and performed it well, and I really hope it inspires teams to consider more women for executive roles and inspires girls to realize their potential; but again, those Marlins teams kinda sucked. They pretty much sucked this year too, it's just that anything looks better than the dumpster fire that was the 2023 White Sox. All this is to say, I don't actually think it matters that much who the 'top dog' is, what matters is the quality of the support staff. You can hire all these brilliant middle managers, but what's the point if they have no employees to manage? Is Reinsdorf going to pay salaries and benefits to 100 more scouts, coaches and analysts? Those people might unionize, that's the "risk" of hiring staff. I'd also speculate at Ng's academic background for the same reason as Hahn, these eggheads have been brainwashed into the mantra that "lean" organizations are the best option, that you only need 1 or 2 Ivy League types and the few technicians are just yokels who carry out orders. My belief is that these execs actually agree with Jerry about how to run a business and their ego is stroked by having outsized success on a shoestring budget that they can credit entirely to themselves. The only people who actually care about winning is fans.

I tend to think if it there's some evidence that cricket fans will actually enjoy baseball and pay to watch it (why wouldn't they), why wouldn't MBS's sports driven economy extend to something "disruptive" and "innovative" like baseball? Maybe it's America's pastime, but it's a fun sport that anyone could like. And cricket is arguably South Asia's pastime despite colonialism... maybe baseball has a better reputation because it wasn't created by the British? There's some evidence to suggest that colonized countries appreciate American ideas because we weren't their conquerors, for right or for wrong. I agree, but personally I don't like the idea of paying 16-year-olds $5million on the expectation that "investing" in a child will pay dividends one day for an American corporation. I don't like the idea of getting into bidding wars with countries over prospects with even worse labor standards than us, I'd like for the sport to be publicly owned personally, but maybe this is proof that that's not possible unless you're relying on an entirely domestic player base. That saddens me. Maybe that only exists in the NFL. Frankly, I see no reason why a public good like sports should be profit-oriented, except that there might be competition with leagues that will make it profit-oriented. What a world.

well, better corner outfielders were available than Benny last offseason. Canha and Pham were acquired fairly cheaply too during the season. I wouldn't say 2b is easier to fill than a DH though, there aren't a ton of good options. Wasn't Marcus Semien on this team? As far as Muncy, I sort of assume any athlete wants money and a role more than they want to play for a contender. They might even be egotistical enough to believe they'll turn a team into a contender. I'd rather work for a business treading water that will pay me a bunch of money and let me do what I want rather than work for some juggernaut corporation. Feels like a logical human instinct. The Texas Rangers feel like a very good example of "money + role + bottomfeeding team". I keep mentioning Muncy because I'd love to see him on the team, personally.

Jury is still out on Vaughn imo. He takes good at bats, I bet that warning track power could turn into homers eventually. I think he actually wants to get better. I think his defense is underrated too, he's turned plenty of wild throws into outs that I don't think other first basemen make. I don't believe that's counted in WAR or typical defensive metrics. UZR seems to be the one most people like, which I would agree with, but the first baseman has completely different duties, more like a catcher than other position players. Mostly unrelated, anyone else surprised how few MLB stars UC Berkeley actually produces? Looks like Marcus Semien, Mike Epstein, Sam Chapman, Mark Canha, Jeff Kent are the best players that school produced...maybe more, but those are the ones I've ever heard of. I guess Sox "legend" Geoff Blum. All of them were raised in California too. Don't really follow college ball, but I always assumed they had a really good program.

what was Lowe doing there? or Bochy? infield not in but throw home?

Don't you think it's fun that underdog teams made it? Did you really want to watch a repeat of the Astros and Phillies? Or to perpetually see the Dodgers and Yankees there? btw I tend to think the relevance of TV ratings is declining. I'm 30 and don't have cable, I imagine that's true of most everyone in my age group or younger. I illegally stream games because why wouldn't I? The quality is the same and it's incredibly easy to do. Now my dad does it so he doesn't have to sign up for "roku" hockey and baseball. I still have to look at the TV ads, I just don't factor in for the ratings. consider the even younger generation of sport fans who are primarily only interested in watching highlights on TikTok, buying merchandise and gambling. Seems to me that the MLB is doing a better job of capturing new fans with their updated social media policies. Additionally, franchise values continue to soar in every sport despite declining TV ratings across the board. These media rights contracts are obviously a giant source of revenue, but I'll be eyeing the NBA's new deal for the 2025-26 season. The NBA is supposedly expecting the AAV of the deal to increase from $2.7B to $6.8B despite plummeting ratings.

I mean, some degree of risk taking is necessary. I'm not "freaking out" about anything, it just seems to me like whatever injury-related concerns about Eder might also exist for the power hitter who has a more extreme injury history and is two years older and plays a game that will almost certainly regress with age. Burger's skillset is also more replaceable than a left-handed starter and is frankly redundant on this team. Sign Muncy this offseason if you want, that's essentially the same player with a better eye. some degree of risk taking is necessary. my opinion is that it's worth the risk.

at AA, I only saw his fastball get clocked at 91mph early in the game. looks like he's touching mid 90s again. to me, it was a risk worth taking. The command is obviously concerning, but 0 walks in his last outing may be cause for optimism. Never been that high on Burger frankly, dingers are fun but he shouldn't play the field anywhere except 1B and he is about as big an injury concern as Eloy is. Florida fans were not happy to let go of Eder and can we really expect Burger or any power bat to continue "improving" into his 30s? Or is this his prime? Fan favorite by default I guess because of how absolutely fucking miserable this season was (and how unlikeable the team was), but yeah I'd still take a flyer on a LHP starter prospect with his potential ceiling. If he hits, no one will remember Jake.

This is fascinating and a little scary. At the moment, it seems like a joke, "drafting" nobodies and aged stars. How about next year when they start giving 10 million dollar bonuses to international prospects or high schoolers? I tend to think there isn't a market for baseball there like there is for soccer, golf or even basketball; but it would be pretty easy for them to throw a wrench in the MLB considering how exploitative our minor league system is, much more so relative to the NBA where the best guys are salaried employees making millions immediately. It saddens me because I keep thinking a sport like baseball could be nationalized and the profit motive could be taken away because baseball players don't really have many other options, but arab princelings have realized that oil money is a facade and tourism and sport is the new facade to "grow" their economy. it won't work, but sports will suffer in the mean time as well as any other (male only) cultural endeavor they want to get into.

we'll see. people like a comeback story too. I don't know that people turned on Tim like you say. I think you're right that getting KO'd by high-talking fat boy hurt his image more than his s%*# play, but I think fans have a longer memory than social media would have us think. personally, I care more about the state of the baseball team than the storylines surrounding it or how much money the team is bringing in though. I care about the revenue insofar as I don't want the team to leave, but my personal feeling is that it's going to happen regardless. I also care a little bit too about how baseball and the Sox are an analogy for society and our city. In the latter sense, I wouldn't write off Tim. I think he represents the city well and is not the cancer some imagine. He's never criticized a coach or a teammate, he gets offended by internet criticism and I don't blame him, I would too, 14 million dollar contract or not. I would rather write off the guys who respond with a laugh emoji but don't write a post...at least make it look like a thumbs down.

I'm not kidding and I don't dispute anything you say but frankly this team is on the south side of Chicago and people do like Tim. I don't want to derail the topic so I'll leave it at this post, but personally, I like his spirit and what he represents but could take him or leave him as a ball player, even when he was good. He's a guy I want to root for and a lot of people feel the same way. And so the fact that this board thought Jake Burger was more of a fan favorite than Tim is, to me, emblematic of that disconnect I mentioned and absurd enough of a sentiment to write a post about. I'm dead fuckin serious when I say I never see a Sox jersey that isn't Tim Anderson's, including Luis Robert or Harold Baines or Konerko or Dye or whoever else. Frankly, I don't give a f*** about TV ratings and I don't think any sports team does either. It declined at that rate for us because we as fans anticipated the team to be good last year and it wasn't. And of course we were even worse this year. What is there to even watch unless you're an obsessive type that talks about sports on online message boards? That isn't the fanbase. I'll be concerned when this team is making the playoffs and is showing tr*picana field numbers. games 3 and 4 of the 2021 ALDS were packed. I pay closer attention to the NBA than MLB, and TV ratings decline on a yearly basis in that sport yet basketball related income increases steadily (everybody gets paid more, the sport gets worse, I pay more attention to a different sport). these loser teams are making money hand over fist regardless of the fact that nobody watches tv anymore. if jerry wants to make money again, he'll do it by developing a new park and a surrounding "district" because that's how they make even more money nowadays beyond their typical con artistry. I have more to write about the attendance thing and I'll do it in the other thread some time tomorrow.

How many millions of dollars does Tim bring into the team just by being Tim Anderson? I feel like this board is disconnected from reality by thinking Tim isn’t a fan favorite and ultimately good for business. I assume he has the top selling jersey on the team, at least it’s the only one I see around town unless it’s a guy who hasn’t been on the team in 15 years.

watching Kimbrel choke has been very satisfying

I don't think that's proven and I'm also not sure how one is even able to prove that. Minor league system rankings are not a function of that. I'm certainly not saying he's the right hire, I just don't buy the logic to explain why. Maybe he's a wunderkind. Maybe not. Is Kim Ng or Chaim Bloom that person? Prove it. I'm surprised that Getz would get a role like this, but as I mentioned, the last time Reinsdorf hired a no name in a leadership role, it resulted in the best basketball team we've seen since Jordan; no surprise that team flopped when he was pushed out. This shouldn't be taken as a Reinsdorf defense or even as cautious optimism, but at least give the guy a chance to do the job.

As far as I can tell, the biggest knock against Getz is that jerry reinsdorf hired him and that there would potentially be better candidates available if we waited a couple months. I have absolutely no clue how to evaluate how a “rookie” will perform at this job, but the last time a reinsdorf team hired a no name rookie for a managerial role that more respected franchises passed over, it resulted in the best (non-cubs) team a Chicago club has produced since 2005. I’m talking Tom Thibs with the Bulls and my general philosophy regarding sports is to try and find diamonds in the rough rather than retreading the same average, not spectacular people. I know nothing about Chris Getz but he’s got the job now and I have no reason to think he’ll either completely s%*# the bed or be the best executive in sports. Kim Ng seems competent and like a nice role model, but what cause for belief is there that she would be better than Chris Getz at the job? Do you know either one of them? Experience? An expanded wild card appearance? If you play that game, on paper, Rick Hahn has a pretty impressive resume. He built a pretty impressive minor league roster and had a few postseason appearances ? I reckon there’s a lot of senior citizens on this board, but “this person did this job for this org for X years” is not a job qualification anymore. It should never have been. You can talk to young people without “experience” and realize they might perform better at a specific job than the old timer with “experience.” The flip side of course is what happens in most workplaces in the real world, and it’s discrimination against older people in favor of some recent college grad who costs nothing and never says no to the boss. is that Chris Getz and jerry reinsdorf’s relationship? Perhaps but I don’t see the precedent for that with the Sox or bulls. I’m a big fan of what Ng’s relative success might mean for inclusivity and creating a cultural endeavor that isn’t just for good ol boys, that it was a long time coming and thus helps the longevity of the sport; but can anyone really measure or otherwise prove, with all else equal, that she’s a better executive than Chris Getz? I have no way of knowing and I don’t think other fans do either beyond the reasonable MO of to distrust every decision Reinsdorf makes. The criticism of Getz lies on the belief that reinsdorf and his lackeys will undoubtedly hire the wrong person. Which is fair enough, I’m just not compelled by it.

Seems pointless to acquire aging/potentially expensive veterans at this stage. Maybe when we thought there was any hope, ie last offseason. Now it seems like there’s none til at least 2025. I like max muncy but what does he do to get this team over the hump? The ‘hump’ being ‘not losing 100 games’ — I think not much. then again, you can always sign them simply to trade at the deadline. That makes this exercise more fun and it probably revolves around who is going to take a “prove it” deal. I’d think giolito and flaherty fit the bill and I’d be more happy to watch next year’s dumpster fire with Gio on the team.