77 Hitmen

This article from June includes a players survey on which organizations have good reputations and which ones have bad reputations. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6406636/2025/06/11/best-worst-mlb-manager-2025-player-poll/ Of the top 14 best ranked organizations, all but two are large market teams. The only exceptions to it otherwise being all big market teams are the Guardians and Rays. Among the bottom 16 teams, the only large market teams are the Angels and White Sox. And we all know that Reinsdorf has been running the Sox like they're a small market team for years now. The Nationals and Diamondbacks are in the lower half, but are basically neutral in this survey (one good vote for the D-Backs and one bad vote for the Nats). What struck me is how, with only a very few exceptions, this list splits out almost perfectly between big market and small market teams. Do people believe that nearly all the bad owners just happen to be in small markets while nearly all the good owners are in big markets with lots of revenue streams coming in? Of course there are a small handful of exceptions like how JR has run our favorite franchise into the ground, how the Angels are a mess, and how the Rays almost always overachieve. That doesn't mean I support a salary cap, though. This is the owners' problem, not a players' problem. But the competitive balance issue is real. Unfortunately, it seems like Manfred is intent on using a salary cap to fix their mess.

He now has 7 HRs since being called up. Nice 3-run blast today.

When did the Sox have the highest payroll?

Agreed. Since the subject of this thread is hope, the best we can hope for IMO is for the Sox to tread water and make themselves at least somewhat watchable for the next few years with some decent (albeit not enough) talent. The needle won't move dramatically until 1) Ishbia takes over, 2) he brings in competent people to run the team, 3) he starts spending on A-level free agents.... and 4) he hopefully moves the team to a new stadium at the 78. We know that first thing is going to happen, but not until 2029 at the earliest. From there I'm optimistic about 2 and 3 happening. That last one on my wish list isn't about baseball operations, but IMO that along with more winning teams would help the Sox compete financially with the rest of the league in the coming years.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up most expensive MLB contracts and Benintendi's ranks only 81st (tied with 5 other players) highest priced current contract. It's only under Jerry Reinsdorf that such a contract is considered the biggest one ever and we're conditioned to expect that he was brought in to be a superstar for us based on what the Sox shelled out for him. Even Pittsburgh has 2 players with more expensive contracts. Only the homeless A's have a lower highest paid contract ever. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/rankings/player/_/year/2025/sort/contract_value

The one thing that is worse than anger or hatred of the team is total indifference. You're right, this is what's happening and it's concerning. That doesn't mean I want the Sox to make any short-sighted moves to "go for" a 90-loss season next year, but it'll definitely be a challenge to rebuild interest in this team once this franchise finally, someday gets itself truly turned around.

But who hires and keeps the people who have been terrible at picking which players to spend money on and also who hires people terrible at drafting and developing players? It all goes back to Jerry.

In other stadium news, it looks like the price tag for the new A's stadium in Vegas has soared to over $2B. Plus the 2nd article raises questions about whether the park will ever be completed. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/fisher-says-cost-for-the-las-vegas-as-ballpark-has-risen-above-2-billion https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/jul/02/athletics-las-vegas-stadium-john-fisher-mlb-debacle

Maybe die-hard Cubs fans who will hate the Sox no matter what would say that, but otherwise I seriously doubt it. Retro parks are here to stay. Many of the most popular ones that were built are now over 20 to 30 years old and no one is even hinting about replacing them. They'll be here for at least another 20 or 30 years is my guess. The only retro-era parks that didn't last are Globe Life Park (because an open-air stadium was problematic in the intense Texas heat) and Turner Field (because the Braves wanted to build an entertainment district). The only other one I can think of that I'd call a flop is the Marlins stadium in Miami. Bland, generic ballparks that lack character aren't making a comeback. Now, if the Sox built a new retro style on the site of Old Comiskey AND they continued to surround the area with nothing but parking lots, then they'll be wasting their money IMO and they'll garner criticism and still have trouble drawing fans unless they're winning pennants every few years in perpetuity. And don't get me wrong, when I go to Sox games and sit in the lower deck, I find the place very enjoyable and don't go around thinking how much it sucks. But nonetheless, it's still seen as a boring, forgettable park by many, many people....and not just by jerk Cub fans who have it in for us.

Maybe the Sox hired a hypnotist to convince him that he's been traded to the Brewers?

Pope Leo gets Aurelio's pizza handed to him while greeting a crowd at the Vatican. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pope-gets-little-slice-home-vatican-city-special-delivery-chicago-pizz-rcna222205

In other sports facility news, the San Antonio Spurs are committing $1B toward a new downtown basketball arena and entertainment district. https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2025/07/25/san-antonio-spurs-outline-proposed-investment-details-for-downtown-arena/ If built, this would be their 3rd new stadium since 1993.

Chinatown residents express concern about the new Fire stadium at the 78: https://www.nbcchicago.com/chicago-sports-bears-sox-cubs-bulls-blackhawks/chinatown-residents-express-concerns-over-proposed-chicago-fire-stadium/3802086/ https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2025/07/30/chinatown-chicago-fire-stadium

People under age 40 probably cannot really appreciate how powerful and effective WGN's Cubs hype machine was from the early 80s until about the mid 90s. Like you said in another thread: Harry and WGN.

It's been a few years since I've been to Rate Field, but my experience has always been that the service at the concessions are sooooo slooooowwww! People shouldn't underestimate how much the entire gameday experience (including before and after the game) impacts how many people a team can get to show up. It's not just as simple as fielding a winning time while providing a mediocre experience at the ballpark anymore. Maybe that worked 30 years ago, but not today. The whole Petco experience for me felt like it was on an entirely different level than what I experience at Rate Field with the only downside is that my favorite team wasn't playing.

Bingo. Everyone in the organization above Southpaw should be worried about their jobs if he starts holding people accountable when he finally takes over. Too bad we have to wait until at least 2029 to find out if that'll happen.

The Padres are an interesting, perhaps unique, case. Metro area population is middle of the pack, but interesting that it's media market is bottom 3. As you said, they get big attendance numbers (3M/year since Covid). Even when they were mediocre in the years before Covid, they drew well. Yeah, great weather and beautiful ballpark at a great location must help. Any Sox fan who says Rate Field is "just fine" should go to a stadium like Petco Park. And yes, San Diego is the only city with a MLB team and no other teams from the other major sports leagues. It'd be like if Chicago had the White Sox, but no Cubs, Bears, Bulls, and Blackhawks.

I agree. I don't think we're that far off in our opinions. Bad ownership groups across the league are definitely a problem and Manfred just wants to go around trying to convince players that the salary cap cudgel will cure their problems.

To look at it another way, of the top 12 payroll teams, only the Braves and Diamondbacks are floundering. And for the Braves, this is after they've made the postseason 7 years in a row and the D-Back are only 2 years removed from winning the pennant. If you look at all the big market teams, the only ones who aren't making the playoffs on a regular basis are the White Sox and Angels. Perhaps the Cubs too over the last 4 years, but they seem to be back in playoff contention.

Am I missing something? 4 of the 6 division leaders are high payroll, big market teams. The AL Central is all small/medium market teams (since the Sox operate like a small market team). Someone has to be in first there. If not the Tigers, then who? The Brewers are the only outlier as far as I can see. And look at who is in the lead for the wild card spots as of today: Cubs, Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Padres, Mariners. 5 of the 6 are high payroll and/or big market teams. Only Seattle isn't big market or big payroll....and they're only 1 game ahead of big market/big payroll Texas for a WC spot. And again, I agree this is an owners problem, not a players problem and just pushing a salary cap isn't the answer. But don't agree that there isn't a growing competitive balance problem in the league.

Agreed about Loria, the man who ruined the Expos franchise. Oh, and I forgot to include the 2006 Cardinals in the list of teams that have won the WS since the Marlins' last title. So, that's twice the Cardinals won it all in that timeframe, but they're one of the most successful teams in MLB history (only the Yankees have won more titles) with tons of fan support. But even they seem to be sliding into mediocrity in recent years.

That's an excellent question for Jerry Reinsdorf. It's a self-fulling prophecy IMO. For a long time, he's run this franchise like it's a small market team and he's pretty much reaped what he sowed with market share. We can only hope that Ishbia can bust us out of this "small market" mindset when he takes control. Interestingly, I just looked up all the World Series champs since the Marlins won in 2003. It's almost all major market teams for 21 seasons. I didn't realize it was so lopsided. The only exceptions were the 2006 and 2011 Cardinals (medium market) and the 2015 Royals (definitely small market). Plus the 2019 Nats, where it can be argued they're more of a medium market team than major market. Otherwise, it's all NY, Chicago, LA, Bay Area, Boston, Texas teams (those are HUGE markets), and Atlanta (once) for over 2 decades. I'd definitely consider the Braves a major market team - they own the entire South outside of Florida and have a huge regional following from their WTBS years. They're a financial powerhouse. Market size does matter. And I agree with you that a salary cap doesn't solve those issues. Look at what happened when they imposed a luxury tax and revenue sharing for smaller market teams. Teams like the Pirates just pocketed those competitive balance subsidies instead of pouring it back into the team and John Fisher drove the A's out of Oakland into nomad status for the next few years.

Two options: - Slim - None

But, what if the hot dog has ketchup on it?

I partially agree. Yes, it's an owners problem and a salary cap isn't going to fix that, but there's no denying that there's a revenue problem with some teams having a payroll of over $300M and other teams hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, including the White Sox. And while some teams have staggering amounts of debt ($450M for the Twins), the Braves are bringing in something like $600M in revenue from all their income streams (including their baseball village). Washington and Arizona aren't small market teams. The DC area is the 7th largest metro area in the US and the Phoenix area is 10th and growing. The Royals WS title was 10 years ago, the last small market team to win a WS. And yes, there are small market teams like Milwaukee, Tampa Bay and Cleveland that perpetually seem to be in the playoff hunt. But at least the latter two always have to start over again every couple of years as their good players move on to big markets. Overall, I'm probably with the players on this. The owners are all billionaires and many benefit from having taxpayer funded stadiums gifted to them. So, you're not wrong. But that doesn't mean that the economics of MLB isn't getting out of hand. The owners are going to have to clean up their own house instead of looking to imposing a salary cap on the players as a "solution".