ptatc

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 08:40 AM) Why are you so fascinated with season ticket sales? I will tell you one thing, I have a small weekend package right now and yesterday was upgrade day. There wasn't a lot of upgrades available. The people with the good seats kept them. I agree. I looked at the upgrades and couldn't find anything worth switching to. Maybe the sales are great but they haven't dropped off a cliff.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 07:27 AM) SoxFest will be SnoozeFest at this point, unfortunately. Frazier will get some coverage, and that will be about it....along with Benetti/Stone. They seem to be hitting it off well. Are you kidding me? Soxfest will be a murderfest if no one else signs. I'll bet that it will get more attention if nothing is done than if they sign cespedes. Already the score morning show is saying how bad they will be for settling for second teir acquisitions. The score will stir up the fanbase about how much better the cubs will be and what the sox shouls hafe done.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 01:28 AM) The other issue with Abreu is his size...guaranteeing a long-term extension for a huge 1B that puts so much pressure and stress on his knees and feet/ankles into his 30's might not be the ideal solution for the organization either, as almost all of his value is going to have to come from his offensive numbers. More importantly, it's kinda backwards thinking. Well, we probably won't compete until 2017 if we don't do something dramatic, but we need to worry about what happens with Abreu or Eaton in arbitration, retaining Sale or dealing with Boras/Rodon in 2019/2020. It's much more likely the White Sox can actually afford Abreu if they maximize their revenues over the next two seasons instead of decreasing them. The size of a person has absolutely no correlation to injury. That is a totally uninformed statement.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 08:50 PM) Tony is a Cubs fan though, so that explains why he wants Fowler Crap I didn't realize that. Oh, well at least it's company.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 08:47 PM) Couldn't agree more, well done Wow, we have a third person to agree with us.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 08:13 PM) I'll just say this, if Cespedes signs a 4 year deal with another team and it's anyone but the Mets, this board will implode and Rick Hahn might get murdered at SoxFest. This late in the game, it's hard to believe this three year s*** is posturing. NASCAR

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 01:12 PM) The meltdown if it came out right now the Sox signed Fowler would be epic NASCAR

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 10:31 AM) I've never heard anyone question DD's integrity, and he didn't need to find a new job prematurely. I don't believe that he negotiated behind the Tigers backs. I wouldn't think so. He was the GM for the Marlins when I worked there. He was straight forward even with the medical staff of the lowly minors teams.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:56 PM) Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 11m11 minutes ago Sources: #Tigers were negotiating with Cespedes as well as Upton. This screams to me that Cespedes wants more than 6-132 Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:10 PM) I re-upped my modest package after Frazier. This time, I'm just going to give away april/may tickets. God I hate going to games then. Agreed. Sell them on the stub hub electronic link. Even if it's only 10 on the day of the game, I've never had unused tickets. That's what I do early in the season.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:00 PM) I don't disagree with any of this, and I do think lots of improvements have been made. I do think scouting is better. I am intrigued by Steverson's role as hitting coordinator on lower levels we are hearing about. I am excited for Marco Paddy's returns. But these two things are driving me nuts: - That we are middling in our team strategy for only incremental progress at the ML level, and never cashing in on excellent value if it means temporary regression - Not spending on international FA There are these great value areas where sox are not looking at because they think "rebuilding" will kill attendance (its dead), and its preventing a period of rapid improvement when that value hits. That is a great point. It all just depends on the budget RH gets. The more he puts in the international FA the less there is for the MLB club. I for one would like to see more of it going to the prospect area, like the international FA, as opposed to a player like Cepedes. I think this is the way to continually keep the Sox competitive. Add more prospects via this manner to supplement the draft and the chances improve on finding the impact players.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:50 PM) Well, I disagree that they have done a good job. They have won 63, 72 and 75 games in 3 years. With big upgrades at 3b and possibly at 2b, and possible downgrade at rotation, we are looking at 78-79 wins. In 2 years, when all of these contracts expire, we have to hope that all: Tim Anderson Trey M Are in the big leagues and high level producers immediately while we win a lottery ticket with : Jacob May Adam Engel Courtney Hawkins Maybe Adolfo will be a beast and be close to majors in 2 years. Otherwise you are looking at another round of gauge and plug with FA/trades on the minor league front. In four years, the core of Sale/Q/Abreu/Eaton basically falls apart. In two years you are expecting all of our minor league work to pan out. That is doubtful. The best contribution we may see is if Sale/Q/Rodon find themselves supplemented by budding superstars Adams/Fullmer/Danish for one last run. This isn't a "well what's the point of even playing the games!" point. Its just if you really valued having a winner with your current core, and you do not want to give up future competitiveness, then paying the large sum for a player like cespedes is necessary. Otherwise, you will hit a ceiling from the teams that kill us in player development. I agree that haven't done well. I think it started last year. Previous to that I think it was a "win now" each year. I think it shifted last year. I'm never expecting all of the minor leaguers to work out. As a matter of fact, I'm expecting most won't. However, if you keep adding at least 2-3 each year some will work out and then they will begin to form a pipeline and be more consistent. It won't happen for a few years. However, good trades as they've done this year and short term FA deals as they did last year will help to improve the team as this happens. I have nothing against the FAs or even signing Cespedes, as long as they are short deals. Save the long deals for their own players, the ones they know. You knows I may be wrong and they find they really like Frazier and he wants to stay.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) If they based all of their decisions on what was going on in the minors and also did not want to have a high payroll, we would be looking at an organization that valued acquiring top-level prospects and cost-controlled players. That is not how the white sox front office is operating. Case in point, those making the argument that Fowler is attractive to management because we would not have to pay another 1st round comp. I agree. However, it is posters asking to acquire Fowler, not the Sox FO. All of this is risk management. If the FO feels the chances of making the playoffs with Fowler out-weigh the chances of the comp pick being an impact player, they may make the deal. My whole point of this is protecting the future while trying to improve the team. So far I think they have done a good job. A deal for Cespedes that doesn't restrict the team in the future would be good as well. I'm just not convinced that he is the player to whom you give the long term contract. I don't trust his consistency. They will need to take that risk at some point, I just think he is the right player.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:26 PM) yes, the FA market is a terrible way to build a team, and yes, Frazier and Lawrie are upgrades over what they had last year, but a team that needs everything to go right to challenge for the 2nd wild card and is much more likely to be at the bottom of the division again "IS" the same old s*** on the field. But they did it this time with a look at the future. I agree the possibility of the playoffs this year is slim as it stands. However, they have no albatross contracts and kept all of the possible impact prospects. The team improve and have a slim possiblity of playoffs and protected the future. If they continue to do this it will lead to better chance of sustained success as opposed to loading the team with unmanageable contracts.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:13 PM) And they said Micah was the starting 2b on a team supposed to compete for the AL Central in 2015, then shipped him away and you've spent weeks telling me how the White Sox didn't give up much when they gave him up. The idea that we're projecting a 3b who hasn't even seen AA yet with so far a .720 OPS in his minor league career as a key cog in the team the last 2 years before Sale and Abreu hit free agency is ludicrous. Right. so they traded the prospect who they felt wasn't going to work out for a player they felt would at the MLB level. They need to plan on when these players will get a chance at the MLB level. They gave Johnson his shot. He did not take advantage of it and they felt the need to move on. This is what will happen when Trey M. is ready.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:17 PM) The kid is 19/20 in high-A, I wouldn't make any decisions based on that assumption. They need to base all of their decisions on what is going on in the minors. He may not make it and all prospects are suspects until they reach the MLB. However, unless the payroll projects to 200 million, they will need to reply on the minors and project when to give the players a chance.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 01:05 PM) Isn't one of the White Sox better prospects a 3B who should be ready in a couple of years? Yes. In one interview RH basically said that Frazier is here until Trey M. is ready. He's basically a really good stopgap.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 12:33 PM) I agree. The thing that is funny is that whenever there's a report about another team being out (Tigers and Angels Luxury Tax Issues) everyone thinks it's total nonsense and doesn't believe it. But when someone says that the White Sox are only willing o go 3 years and low money, everyone takes it as gospel. It really is quite absurd. Yes, the organization hates all of us. They are being stupid on purpose. This place is a dumpster fire right now. But entertaining. As I said before, come here to watch a NASCAR race, lots of boring time but when there is a wreck, it's entertaining.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 09:06 AM) If he went to the Angels on a 6 year deal or the Mets on a 1-2 year deal, can we really be upset about it though? If he stays in New York it's because he wants to be in New York. If he happens to get a 6 year deal, the Sox were never entertaining a 6 year deal anyway. Oh wait nevermind. Of course this fanbase will be mad. I agree. I will only be really critical if he signs a 4 year deal somewhere other than New York. If he signs a 5-6 year deal, good for him bad for the team.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 11:28 PM) You are a terrific poster on this site, and I enjoy your many contributions. On the bolded, though, may I ask how you know this? How could one LT contract for someone of Cespedes' caliber, with none other like it on the roster and with all of the VERY team-friendly contracts currently on the books, how could this one potential contract possibly "cripple" the team's finances? What happens if Cespedes' contributions translate into a return to the postseason in the way his presence on the Mets did last year? Won't that go a long ways towards paying off the investment? Just because we've been conditioned by the current owner/management team to just automatically shun all investments of this kind, doesn't make them all bad. Sometimes you have to take a risk or two in the name of trying to win. You can't wait around to build an entire roster of team-friendly contracts to get there. Cespedes is still young enough to make this kind of investment worthwhile which, at least in the early years of the contract, should help management achieve it's stated objective of "maximizing its opportunity to return to the postseason with the current core". There are ways to deal with the remaining years of an expensive contract if players begin not performing to the levels for which they are being paid. We see that happen all the time. But with the additions of Lawrie and Frazier, how does not bringing Cespedes into the fold now make no sense? I haven't been conditioned by the ownership to believe anything. Im going by their track record. If they sign a player to a 22 million dollar deal, that is about 1/6 of the maximum payroll we've seen them use. Do you really want that much money tied up in a player that is this inconsistent? I would not. It wouldn't be a big deal if they had a 200 million dollsr payroll, but I wouldn't bet on that happening. Im just using common sense and their track record. Its not the only way to solve this problem but in my view its the better way. They could just spending away ala Ilitch but I dont think its likley to happen. If they were spending this money on Miguel c abrera or Mike trout or someone with a track record it would be a different story.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 11:19 PM) How do you know they wouldn't survive a strip down? That is what irritates me so much, this defeatist attitude of accepting mediocrity and "going for it" (meanwhile we're at best a .500 team) based upon the same f***ing system that hasn't led us anywhere since 2008! I was all in support of rebuilding this offseason, but after trading for Frazier and Lawrie (which were both good deals) we almost had to sign one of Gordon, Upton or Cespedes to add another legitimate mid-order bat. Whatever excuse there is, thus far we've failed. Improving to .500 and wasting yet another season of our starting pitching is a disgrace. If you're going to go for it......gor for it all the way. How are we going to acquire a middle of the order bat next offseason with slim pickings? I don't see building this way as mediocrity. I see that as the procees of sacrificing the future with long term deals. Its just my guess they would survive the strip down. They might. If you were the FO, would you take that chance? I don't think I would

QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 10:59 PM) Cespedes is only $$ tho, in a non salary cap sport. With big dollars coming off the books next year. How is signing Cespedes a sellout? I could see a draft pick was involved, or we were trading prospects for an older player...but a straight purchase, as it were, doesn't define 'sellout' to me. Only if the deal is longer than 4 years. If its only 4 it would work. I know there is no MLB cap but we know the ownership has one and if cespedes is dead money for 3 years it will cripple the finances.

QUOTE (blackmooncreeping @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 10:53 PM) Yes actually, I'll take a World Series win every 11 or 12 years, because the organization hasn't shown the ability to be able to put together a year-in, year-out playoff contender...ever. The idea of building from within for a sustained period of success is a great notion, but it doesn't fit the reality of what this front office has done over the past however many years. Ok. I know you understand it but the people who are complaining that they have only made one playoff appearance in the last decade need to understand it. You cant have a consistent playoff contender and go for it every year. They are mutually exclusive. The go for it every year philosophy depletes resources and means they will need to start over. And I'm not saying that signing cespdes to the long term deal wont produce a winner in the next few years. I'm saying that I wouldn't do it because it will lead to another dry spell if it fails. You think people were on the FO for the 4vyear Dunn deal, imagine if the deal for cespedes is 6 years.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 10:37 PM) Therein lies the problem...even if Anderson and Fulmer are even better than expected (in 2017), you're wasting another season and lowering your aggregate revenues even more prior to next year. Unless there are tremendous breakthroughs in the farm system, then we'll be in that rare position of having a 3rd quartile payroll, a Bottom 5 farm system and lacking the front office willpower to take on any more longer-term deals because of the fear they'll bust like Dunn/LaRoche/Cabrera. Our orientation is neither towards the future nor towards the present. It just makes giving four years to Robertson when now two of them might have been wasted seem even more ill-advised...we would have been better off letting the Yankees claim him and freeing up that money for hitting, because we've historically been much better at unearthing closers than developing outfielders. I agree with the Robertson part. However with the rest of it, I'm the first to say that ALL prospects are suspects. However since it is obvious the the team ownership/management either cant or won't have a near 200 million payroll, it is the only viable optiin to build a consistent winner.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 10:37 PM) He had trade value, obviously. Using him on Todd Frazier means you can't use him for someone else. Also find it hilarious we can be so patient in not breaking bank on a needed improvement, but can't possibly wait and see if some of our infield prospects are worthwhile. I dont know about you but what I saw from him last year didnt give me any indication he could be an impact player. Major league player possibly but not impact.