southsider2k5

And still wins.

The transaction was announced in April 1980, which was a strike year, so I went with 1981s attendance. All that to say, the post statistics are still accurate. The Sox have a shrinking fan base since Jerry took over, and for some reason there are those pretending like we can't mess with success. It's not the good old days anymore and the Sox are being left behind.

I will even tack on to this, Jerry bought the team in April 1980. In his first full (non-strike) season as owner the White Sox averaged 19,316 per game. This year the Sox averaged 17,849. The only teams behind the White Sox? They are playing in literal Minor League ballparks and are looking at potential moves. It's the same location since 1910. It's the same owner since 1980. It's the same park since 1991. Tell me again how all of these things are soooo important to a franchise whose fanbase is shrinking and among the smallest in baseball.

If they "understand it" why are fewer fans at any point since 1999 going to games at this location, despite there being parking, Jerry Reinsdorf, and located where they have been since 1910?

Let's be real. While there are some much older people in the Sox fan base, for the vast majority of it, they don't remember the 1950's or 1960's. The median age right now in the US is 38.7 years. Somewhere around 5 out of 6 people in the US right now are under 65.

Depending on who they are, and where they ranked, it absolutely could. Also that isn't the only reason the Sox list dropped. Smith and Schultz had pretty awful years too. A year ago Colson was #9. Any system is going to give much heavier weight at the top, vs at the bottom. It's common sense. You don't just count up top 100 guys and equate them equally. The Tigers having #2 and #8 is worth more than the Sox top two guys of #35 and #40, even though they are both in the top 100. Just since the midseason when we were number 17, our top two guys fell in the rankings. despite all of the season's graduations in front of them. The weight is going to be heavier up front.

How are you offended by basic math?

It means 1967 was almost 60 years ago, and that puts you really close to the age where you start collecting social security. It wasn't that deep.

Nice of Cohen to finally let Stearns hire his own people.... no wait...

That overlooks like a hitter gets to hit once every nine team ABs, while a starting pitcher throws to all nine of them when they are in. Garrett Crochet was 2nd in MLB with 814 batters faced. Looking quickly the leading batters had about 700 PAs.

Colson's floor is what we saw with is back injuries and his sub .100 stretches with a ton of strikeouts.

I also remember Robert out there swinging with one arm for an entire September.

I am sure the weighting of the systems changes because of where guys rank too. If you just rawdog adding up how many people are in top 100, that equates 100 with 1 as equal. With a team like the Tigers skewing towards the front with less players, but 2 top 10s, and 4 top 40s, that could outweigh the Sox five who starts at 35 and are mostly in the backhalf.

Honestly, I think the theme was having guys play through injuries, and it destroyed their legs being more of the problem.

To be fair, Yoan was on a start track after his first two years, and then just cratered.

Keeping par doesn't work. We need to make up 20-30 games. That's the point.

They need a top pick so badly. While this looks great in isolation, take the Tigers who have the #2, #8, #33, and #37 guys in this list. Cleveland has 17/58/59. These are the types of teams we are chasing.

I don't know how the Cubs don't get more attention with as much money as they make, and as little as they spend.

And to be clear, while it is civil now, it won't stay that way. Someone will come in and turn up the temp, and we already know, someone is waiting to cry about what is said.

Give the hurt feelings a rest.

The Sox brought in an emergency buyer to cover operations debt. Period. End of story.

The Sox have not made money this decade.

We are already there. This location does not hold the fanbases interest if this franchise is not consistently winning. Attendance hasn't been this low since the 1900s. This is also a franchise that has almost moved multiple times. I know this is supposed to scare everyone, but we haven't been away from 35/Shields since 1909, yet this franchise is already in imment danger. The fan base is gone. It's at modern lows. This stadium has been a complete failure.

Thorpe actually probably hurt the worst, as he was a guy who had decent potential depending on how much you believe that change can play in the majors. and now you not only lost that development time, but also a year to a year and a half of control for nothing.