Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 03:05 PM) Based on the Forbes numbers, the White Sox lost ~$5 million last year with a $110 million payroll. They have seen a continued erosion of 1000 tickets sold per game so far this season, a number that is likely to increase before the year ends since we still have the crappy late-september attendances to get through. Their new revenue stream in 2014 is the MLB national TV deal money, which offsets a portion of the erosion in ticket sales since 2013, but they're also reportedly near the bottom of the league in TV ratings and advertising money right now. All of this has worked together to make the White Sox in 2014 profitable at a level of $91 million based on public statements, but there is no new revenue stream coming onto the table next year compared to this year. The continued erosion of revenues at the gate and in the ballpark we're witnessing means that if the team holds steady at $91 million, they're closer to their break-even point than this year and if they go beyond it there's a good chance they go into the red unless they can push ticket sales the other way. I can't give you exact numbers to within a million dollars, but I think it's pretty clear that in 2014 their break-even payroll would be in the range of $100 million and they would have every reason to expect continued erosion of ticket sales by about 1000/game next year, along with little/no boost in ratings or ad sales. If they'd signed Tanaka at what they'd offered him they'd very likely be in the red for another season. I could see them doing that if a 27 year old good fit was on the free agent market. I cannot see them doing that for 34-36 year old stopgaps. Balta, have you ever worked in the business world? You realize they could cut other operating expenses and increase payroll without an increase in revenue right? There's a lot more that goes into the operating profit equation for a baseball team than just revenue and payroll. And how the f*** do you know they have no new revenue streams next year? Where do you come up with this stuff? I have never seen someone infer so much from a basic Forbes article.

Balta, I'm amazed that your able to determine the White Sox's break even-point so accurately, but you can't account for their $46M in payroll obligations next year. John Danks $15,750,000 Alexei Ramirez $10,000,000 Jose Abreu $8,666,666 Chris Sale $6,000,000 Jeff Keppinger $4,500,000 Jose Quintana $1,000,000 Felipe Paulino $250,000 The $46M already includes Keppinger's corpse and Paulino's buyout. You're right about the arb guys and the total cost of all the minimum salaries however, so we probably are near $60M to field a full roster. Either way, I have no doubt the Sox will be able to afford a $100M payroll next year, regardless of if they actually spend it. While I'm impressed that you have direct access to the Sox's financials, you've yet to convince me that we're approaching some $90M payroll limitation, especially when you have no insight into their 2015 revenue forecasts that their payroll budget will be based on.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 29, 2014 -> 04:13 PM) There's evidence that the #5 hole is a great place for a high contact hitter with some propensity for doubles. I think that Alexei, at his best, is a great candidate for #5. From #4 though, I want more dingers. Most studies point to #4 being an even more important position for an all-around offensive threat than people think -- most people's idea of a perfect #3 hitter is usually a better #4 hitter. IMO, this lineup is best with Abreu at #4 and a lefty at #3. Assuming Eaton (L) at leadoff, that works out perfectly as Adam Dunn, with Conor at #5, thus sandwiching Abreu with Lefties and use Connor's "high contact and doubles" really well. In this scenario, I like Ramirez at #2 because of his right handed bat, though ideally we'd like a guy that gets on base more. L Eaton R Ramirez L Dunn R Abreu L Gillaspie ? ? ? ? This is why I love the idea of bringing in Victor Martinez. 1. Eaton 2. Semien 3. Martinez 4. Abreu That has the potential to be a perfectly constructed 1-4 and would be put an insane amount of men on-base before Abreu.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 11:54 AM) My best guess is that right now, assuming De Aza and Viciedo aren't back, the Sox have about $60 million in commitments for next season (with the caveat that we don't know how Abreu's signing bonus is budgeted). With the higher draft and international spending this and next year, and decreasing revenues at the gate, my best guess is that the Sox will have up to $30 million to spend next offseason. They could probably push past that for the right guy, but only if they're in a situation where they think a guy is a perfect fit for the next 5+ years or something like that. $30 million isn't bad, but it's not going to land Shields + VMart + relievers. To add to each of those areas the Sox would have to think about pushing the payroll back into the $115-$120 million range next year, and they lost money at $110 million in payroll last season. I hate doing this all over again, but you're absolutely nuts if you think we're limited to a $90M payroll next year. Budgets are always forwarding looking and both Kenny & Hahn have recently expressed optimism for next season. They've hinted at using their financial flexibility to add some key pieces. No way in hell are they tied this season's payroll, which we already know wasn't maxed out by the Tanaka offer made. And how are you getting to this $60M number? What are you expecting the few arb guys likely to return to actually make?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 01:01 PM) Like say, 3/$45 to a 36 year old DH? Shouldn't he have broken down a long time ago based on your wrong side of 30 theory?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 10:49 AM) He is a target that could intrigue me more than any of the other names you mentioned. Wow, overplaying for a closer in free agency is amongst the worst ways we could spend our money. And how adding a closer intrigues you more than a #2 starter or a 3/4 hitter blows my mind.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 30, 2014 -> 08:28 AM) I don't mind giving up a draft pick to get VMart, because he's far and away the best hitter available. No way I'm giving him $60M, and if it's a 4 year deal it would have to be very front-loaded. Somebody else probably will give him $60M though, so I don't expect to see him on the Sox in 2015. Agree on the draft pick. And I would definitely go 3/$45 to bring him in, but that might not be enough.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Aug 28, 2014 -> 06:47 PM) If he was suspended for that, one would think he would have deleted it Good point, just thought the timing was interesting, especially since he hasn't started in 12 days.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 28, 2014 -> 05:27 PM) Probably wrong here, but judging by Adams twitter, he seems to be goin through a bit of a rough patch. Questioning who his real friends are, saying he hopes it all works out one day, asking himself why all the time, and retweeting some sad stuff. Now I fancy myself the Dr. Phil of NWI, and from what I've gathered, he either broke up with his girl or he was chasing after a girl he liked, got friend zoned and is taking it hard. Probably wrong on that being the reason, but who knows maybe the kid is emotionally fragile when it comes to the ladies and his minds not right right now... If you want a good conspiracy theory, I would say it's more likely he was punished for calling someone on twitter a "f*****" the day after his last start.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 28, 2014 -> 12:23 PM) If Dunn moves, it's "cash considerations or PTBNL." So I caution, if you want Dunn to move, be prepared to accept that the best thing that will happen is someone else gets PT. I'd happily take nothing and open ABs to give to a guy like Semien.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 27, 2014 -> 08:53 PM) But we're also down over 1000 tickets per game sold, again, and that's prior to the weak numbers that appear in September. Every reason to believe that revenues outside of that $20 million have continued to decline. At best, we might be using that $20 million to tread water in revenue, and again, the team was estimated to lose money last year. If they are going to bump payroll back up to $100 million, then we better either be certain we can put a winning team on the field and reverse those trends, or we better be ready for the Sox to go back to being hugely under-slot on the draft and international spending to pay for it. 1,000 tickets a game is worth how much exactly? And how has our average ticket price changed year over year? Also, how much extra money did we spend on the draft and amateur international free agents in 2014 vs. 2013?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 27, 2014 -> 08:26 PM) That extra $20 million replaces most of what the team spent on amateurs and Jose Abreu's signing bonus this year. We're talking about next year? That $20M will still be there.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 27, 2014 -> 08:00 PM) Considering the team lost money last year, and every revenue stream is pretty much promised to be down this season, and they just spent way more money on the minor league system then they have in the teams history... Yeah, it isn't hard to envision something decently under $100 million. The Sox lost $2M last year with a $120M payroll and an absolutely horrific ticket pricing model. Add $20M in incremental revenue from the new national TV deal and it's nearly impossible to think we can't afford a $100M+ payroll.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 27, 2014 -> 07:52 PM) We're at $46 million in commitments right now. Even assuming that we only offer arbitration to guys like Jones and Flowers, non-tendering Viciedo and De Aza, we're still talking about around $10 million, maybe a few million less, for the couple guys we would actually offer. Then, filling out the majority of a roster with minimum salary guys is still going to push another $7-8 million assuming guys like Gillaspie get small raises. That puts us close to $60 million as a good starting point. $30 million in spending would push us beyond this year's payroll, and we also don't know how Abreu's signing bonus is being dealt with. We could afford a $100 million payroll potentially but with the erosion in revenue over the last couple years, I doubt we see that any time soon. Do you have access to their financials? How do you know how much erosion there has been to their revenue? I know they are now receiving $20M/year from the MLB TV deal. I also know they spent over $100M in 7 of the past 8 seasons prior to 2014. Furthermore, they made a serious f***ing offer for Tanaka. Just because they decided to cut back on payroll a bit doesn't mean it was due to a lack of revenue. We all knew this was a transitional year and that they weren't going to spend just to spend. I have no doubt we could have gone into this year with a much higher payroll if Hahn wanted to. Next year should be no different, except that it sounds like Rick thinks we're much closer to being serious competitors.

I still don't know where this $30M talk comes from. We have $46M in salary commitments for next year and only a handful of arbitration eligible players likely to be back. There is no reason we can't afford $100M+ payroll if we so choose. That gives us a good $45M to $50M to work with this offseason depending on which arbitration guys we decide to bring back next year. The problem won't be a lack of money, it will be a lack of quality options to spend it on.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 26, 2014 -> 01:12 PM) Given the (lack of) available options and costs, I still wish we'd see if Wilkins could fill that role, at least as part of a platoon. Balta, I'm convinced you want a $60M payroll next year. Even if we aren't major players in free agency, there is nothing preventing Hahn from acquiring an overpaid, but productive player that costs minimal minor/major league talent. In fact, I'm pretty sure Rick recently hinted at doing just that. I've said this many times, but financial flexibility is worthless if you're afraid to leverage it. I understand you'd like to use your resources on guys like Abreu that offer some potential surplus value, but those guys come few and far between. Sometimes you simply need to add production and pay accordingly. I'll take 3 WAR from James Shields for $20M rather than 1 WAR of Hector Noesi for $2.5M. You may be losing out from a surplus value standpoint, but you've added a decent amount of production to your rotation. And I get you're effectively paying $17.5M for two incremental WAR, but you only have 25 rosters spots to work with. Limiting yourself to a 1 WAR player in one those of spots simply because he's underpaid is quite foolish IMO. If Hahn thinks we're close to being competitive, then he'll use his financial resources to upgrade the roster regardless of potential surplus value.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Aug 26, 2014 -> 01:04 PM) Why wouldn't they just move Semien to LF and keep Gillaspie at 3B? Regardless, all of these positions are not going to be filled internally. They are going to bring in some combination of power and LH hitter(s). Thank you. It's nice to speculate how/if we can fill every spot internally, but it's definitely not a realistic scenario. Hahn is going to bring in some talent from the outside, most likely using our payroll flexibility.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 25, 2014 -> 02:08 PM) He used his last option this year. Once an option is used within the season, they do not have to be exercised beyond that point, so the Sox can send and recall him to their heart's delight (to some degree, as he has to remain in Charlotte for 10 days prior to them recalling him except in the event of injury). You sure about this? Wasn't he added to the 40 man roster during the 2013 season? If so, he should have one option left.

Thank god I will never have to watch another episode of True Blood. What a horrible f***ing finale.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 23, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) Is that because we will intercept the nukes lobbed our way? Any chance there could be a 9/11 type incident involving them polluting our water supplies? Any chance a disease like ebola wipes everything out like the last great Planet of Apes movie? It's pretty obvious we are ruining our own environment little by little. When is that gonna be irreversable? Why have chances decreased? That nutjob in North Korea ... Putin ... and what about China? Are the Chinese out to conquer the world ultimately? Just some threats. Lol...you are a complete nutjob Greg, but you make these threads fun to read.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Aug 22, 2014 -> 11:40 AM) @SethLakso: In Carlos Sanchez, #WhiteSox get elite def. at 2B. Limited power, but expect him to hit around .250 & make the clubhouse a fun place to be. Let's hope he hits a lot higher than .250.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 22, 2014 -> 03:52 PM) I won't disagree with that. His first season gets as big of an F as possible, but it's the clear outlier. He didn't perform as expected, but given what he did the last 3 years, I think an overall grade of a D (which is subjective based anyways) is a bit unreasonable. At worst, I guess I'd give him a C, and I am in agreement that he was a bust of a free agent prize, though he's not the worst free agent signing in Sox history, so at least there's that. His total WAR from 2012 to 2014 will likely end up around 2 by the end of this season. Given that we paid him $42M over the last three years, I'd say a D is more than fair. And that doesn't even include 2011, which is one of the worst seasons in modern baseball history. I'm not a Dunn hater but clearly the move has not worked out for us.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 22, 2014 -> 07:05 AM) Cubs prospects have 0 bearing on ours. Seriously, Caulfield needs to stop bringing them up in every thread.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 22, 2014 -> 06:57 AM) I haven't seen this much hype over a white sox middle infield prospect who didn't at the major league level since... Lol...just a horrible comparison.

For those talking about how we had a chance to see Semien earlier this year, let's not ignore the fact that he only had 142 PAs in AAA prior to his brief major league stint. Clearly he wasn't ready for the majors and was only up due to Beckham's injury. Drawing too many conclusions from those limited at-bats is quite short-sighted IMO.