Thad Bosley

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 03:30 PM) The Sox and Cubs were drawing roughly similar crowds form the mid '70s to early '80s. Caray made a difference for the Cubs because he was on national TV. At the same time, the Sox were on their pay network (and UHF directly before that, IIRC). I'm not arguing that Caray alone was the difference-maker - it was the combination of Caray and WGN's national audience that helped the Cubs before more popular at the time. (And, yes, the 1984 NLCS didn't hurt, either.) 100% correct. Thank you for correcting the revisionist history going on around this topic!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 09:36 AM) You do realize when they did this, the Sox outdrew the Cubs. What happened was 1984. ....with Harry Caray promoting 1984 on WGN and turning the Cubs instantly into both a local and national sensation. Did that happen to Jerry Reinsdorf and Eddie Einhorn's White Sox after their 1983 season on SportsVision? No. Would it have happened if Harry was broadcasting the '83 season on WGN? You betcha. At least Harry thought so, and I agree with him.

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 04:12 PM) I'd say that (1) is more correct, with the major caveat that the current ownership group's poor decision-making decades ago directly resulted in their current second-class status. Back in the early '80s, there was no clear-cut #1 baseball team in Chicago. Given Chicago's North Side/South Side baseball balkanization culture and modern society's downright slavish devotion to political parties, I think that the Sox front office gets a pass for not "converting" Cubs fans after winning the WS. Adults aren't going to switch their allegiance and their kids typically follow the team that their parents follow. Enter the "JR and Einhorn blunders" you mentioned earlier. They took the Sox off of superstation WGN and hid them away on the ill-fated SportsVision, while simultaneously allowing Harry Caray to go to the Cubs to become the rockstar he would become promoting them on WGN, and POOF! The Cubs were the clear-cut #1 team in Chicago by the mid '80s, and have been ever since.

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 08:13 PM) Reinsdorf supposedly wanted Renteria to take over mid-season, but Renteria supposedly said that he didn't want to do that to Ventura. (That's a rumor that somebody posted here a day or two ago.) I agree that Reinsdorf giving his guys too much job security is a huge problem, but I think it's really cynical to say that Reinsdorf doesn't prioritize winning. The truth seems to be that he wants it both ways. That *can* work out (like in 2005), but ultimately creates problems. What can you point to that would remove this cynicism of which you speak that would demonstrate how Reinsdorf prioritizes winning?

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 07:03 PM) I'm not sure that it's an accountability problem. I'd say the problem is Reinsdorf being unwilling to do a rebuild (full or partial) because of his age. Dude wants to win now and can't wait another four or five years to properly construct a winner. Detroit has the same problem with Mike Ilitch. So an entire fan base that some feel lack some perceived level of loyalty, is denied having the team do what they SHOULD do to "properly construct a winner" solely because of decisions the 80 year old owner is arguably recklessly making to accommodate his personal time line? What about that screams WRONG!

If the White Sox are not blaming Ventura for the past five seasons but rather "roster deficiencies", then I wonder when we can expect heads to roll in the FO?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 03:40 PM) I think the rule with the White Sox is that they always think they have a great team and they tell themselves they all did a great job up and down the list. So, when they don't win, it's not because the GM did a bad job, it's because no one could have foreseen Putnam and Petricka getting hurt - Kenny literally said that last month, that was what demolished their season. If you follow that logic, then no part of it is Robin's fault and they have a strategy that works, they're just one player away and they'll need to pay any price for that player this offseason. Again. "The White Sox refuse to blame Ventura for the losing records" seems to fit that model to me and no one in the organization will question that - if anyone were to admit that what they were doing wasn't working, then there might be consequences for that kind of failure. As long as everyone agrees it was just bad luck and no one could have prepared for the team being that unlucky, then no one will have to worry about wins and losses being used to evaluate their performance and everyone keeps cashing their checks. They ought to take a look at where they're at and turn it on its head and not think about where they were unlucky, but rather lucky, They were lucky - clearly - in the 23-10 start to the season. Those 33 games represent approximately 20% of the season. In the other 80%, all of the games since then, the Sox have played at a worse winning % than that of the team that lost 99 games in 2013. If that doesn't put this season into perspective, I don't know what will. Is that just being unlucky in these past 120+ games, with the real team being the good one from the first 33? Or were the Sox lucky in the 33, and are actually the bad team we've seen for the past four months? You decide. If they were somehow finishing the season on the high of going 23-10 in the final 33 games, maybe you could have optimism about the roster and its chances for next year. But that 23-10 record is from four months ago. It's old. The team hasn't played near that level ever since. And too many games have transpired since then to simply chalk the results up to bad luck. The Sox are faced with the same challenges as all of the other teams. Trying to wash away this season by blaming everything on a couple of injuries to some bullpen pitchers is not helpful. Taking a look in the mirror and admitting that the current strategy isn't working is what's needed badly at this point.

The more I read Nightengale's story, the more I think Ventura is NOT coming back. Focus on the two key phrases: he can "return if he wants" and "the White Sox refuse to blame Ventura for the losing records". I mean, what better way for Mr. Loyalty Program Owner to set the stage for a graceful exit of one his prized pups than this. Allowing Ventura to leave on his own terms without the shame of being fired, AND publicy declaring the team doesn't hold him accountable for the past five years of futility. Robin will sail off quietly into the sunset, and then that will be that.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 03:08 PM) Players you change. That is far more effective than swapping out a manager. Again, Joe Maddon, Mike Scoscia, whatever, with this roster, and how the injuries shook out, they all would be fools. Again, if the Sox were ever going to make a change, this seems like the time to do it. It just doesn't upset me that it appears they won't do it like it does most others. I'd rather have them blame players and change them. After these past five years, you do both. Change players and the manager.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Sep 28, 2016 -> 08:18 AM) If the Sox weren't willing to up the ante for Cespedes last offseason, why would they do it this year and give up the 12th pick in the draft to do so? It doesn't make sense. It's set up an interesting Catch-22 for the offseason. According to Hawk at the end of his last broadcast on Sunday, Mr. Reinsdorf expressed to him on a few recent occasions that he, meaning JR, "really, really, really wants to win next year". And so what does that mean to a team that for its final 80% of the season has played at a worse winning % than the team that lost 99 games in 2013? The answer ain't coming out of the minor leagues, as we all know. Maybe a couple of guys here in there on the pitching staff, but certainly nothing position player wise. So what do you do if your plan is to try and win next year? We shall soon see I guess in the ensuing months ahead!!

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 07:54 PM) No, the market is going to be tight enough this winter that he'll command a lot more money than he's worth. JR isn't going to give him the $80M+ that he's going to get on the FA market. We need to shoot higher than him. We've been adding Josh Reddick types for a few years now and well, you've seen how that's worked out for us.

22 years now since the AL Central came into being. Division champions: Indians - 8 Twins - 6 Tigers - 4 Sox - 3 Royals - 1

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 05:15 PM) While I would also not be super-happy about the defensive downgrade of moving Eaton back to CF, the Sox need another high-OBP player more than they need Eaton if RF. Finding a CF who can hit and get on base with a .330+ OBP AND be a defensive upgrade to Eaton is going to be difficult. Especially considering that the Sox are probably not going to give out a $120M+ contract and currently aren't a popular destination for free agents. Also consider that most free agents don't want to DH... unless they're old, slow, and injury-prone like Morneau. If Hahn were able to convince somebody like Cespedes or Reddick to sign with the Sox, I doubt there's any way that either would agree to DH. A best-case scenario to address OF/DH for the Sox this offseason would probably be signing Reddick, moving Eaton back to CF, and convincing Morneau to sign a two-year deal to be our primary DH. I think that Reddick is pretty much a pipe dream, and my guess is that Morneau will end up paying for a team that's closer to winning a ring (e.g., Boston). Have things gotten that bad that acquiring Josh Reddick is considered a "pipe dream"?

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Sep 27, 2016 -> 03:13 PM) I've been following from afar. Have not been watching the product daily since the end of July, but will occasionally check in to see if anything interesting is going on. If anything, I've been closely eyeing the Twitterverse to see the latest in managerial rumors, white sox direction etc.. If the KW/Hahn two headed monster of dysfunction would have acquired young talent at the trade deadline, I would likely be watching everyday. Unfortunately, other than Rodon's progress or Anderson's play, there really isn't a whole lot to hang my hat onto. Although I am very doubtful KW/Hahn can turn this disaster around, I am very curious to see what on Earth their plan is this winter?!? Who will the next manager be? Will they stupidly sacrifice their first round draft choice for an aging free agent acquisition? Or do they simply plan on obtaining talent through trades? Is a rebuild really out of the question? If so then why? Their half-measured approach over the last 8 years has really sucked. The farm system is STILL in pretty poor shape and the main roster is not that good. Great questions, Great Scott! Looking forward to the answers to them myself!

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 25, 2016 -> 02:57 PM) Hawk strongly implying Sox will be buyers this offseason. It was one of the last things he talked about before signing off for the year. He referenced some recent conversations with Reinsdorf where apparently the owner was very clear that he really, really, REALLY wants to win next year. From there he and Stone agreed that this upcoming free agent class was too weak to really provide the quantity and quality of upgrades this team will need if the team has any chance of achieving the owner's desires for next season. Stone then said improvement would need to come via trades, but was optimistic that trades which were discussed at the trade deadline would probably get revisited, but in the sense that the Sox could end up getting certain players they could have never gotten in mid season by teams in the middle of a pennant race. So what does that all mean? Well, the owner seems like he may in fact be going for it, but without the services of one Chris Sale, because he was the one Stone was undoubtedly talking about when referencing the trade deadline rumored trades. Question becomes, can the team compete with the haul received from a Sale trade and some select pickups in free agency? Based on Hawk's comments today, it looks like we might just find out!

Kudos to those who have suggested Gabe Kapler. The suggestion didn't register with me at first, but after doing a little research on the guy, he's a very intriguing individual for an open MLB managerial position. I hope he's in the mix of those under consideration when the time comes to figure out who the next manager in the Sox dugout is!

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 24, 2016 -> 08:17 PM) Avila is probably a better defensive catcher than Navarro was but we need to upgrade for sure Ya think?!

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Sep 24, 2016 -> 03:39 AM) My hope is for the team get younger and aim toward a 3 year rebuild program. I feel Dave Martinez would do wonders with younger players and get the most out of them. Even though we clearly know they will continue to try and scrap together a roster via the weak free agent market and mediocre trades, I would still like them to sign Martinez to a 4 year deal. That is my hope-- the reality: scrap together another mediocre roster, sign an oddball free agent that will cost the team their first round draft pick and will sign AJ or Konerko to become manager. I think you'll get your wish, or something closely resembling it, anyway. Since that 23-10 start from long, long ago, the Sox have gone 49-71 in the 120 games subsequent. That pencils out to an abysmal .408 winning percentage. Only the Twins have played to a worse winning percentage than that this year in all of baseball. Given the sample size of the last 120 games versus the first 33, even my blind dog can see this White Sox team is currently a real clunker. Therefore, I don't expect Kenny Hahn to go on another retooling, put-lipstick-on-a-pig jaunt this winter. That gig is up. Year 1 of the three year plan rendered 76 wins, and it looks like Year 2 is going to cough and wheeze out about the same. I don't think they'll bother with a Year 3, but rather go now in the direction you suggest, which would be the prudent way to go at this point.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Sep 23, 2016 -> 02:08 PM) I made it pretty clear that I'd be fine if they went outside of the organization. If they do, I just prefer it to be a younger guy. Kepler would be great. Even though they aren't necessarily fully out of the organization, Dave Martinez or Sandy Alomar would be cool with me. I'd also like to see someone with some fire. The Sox have been some damn boring the last few years. I'm with you 100% on that, but equally as much, we just need someone who can flat out communicate in an effective manner. I know Ventura is suppose to be a great guy personally and it seems everyone who knows him likes and respects him, but my lord, he's painful to listen to in interviews. Someone with energy and who is a decent communicator, that's what we need!

I'm actually surprised Joe McEwings name isn't in the mix somewhere in this discussion. He's coached under LaRussa and Bobby Valentine, and actually managed in the Sox system at one point, earning a couple of Manager of the Year awards down there. He has the requisite spark that some find attractive in a baseball manager (I am in that camp myself), so he certainly seems to have the credentials to at least be considered for the job.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 23, 2016 -> 07:56 AM) C'mon man. you know JR does not hire experienced managers. They may have ideas of their own. That is not going to happen. Lol - I just weighed in on what I think they should do and what I think a competent front office might be thinking of doing. What the mighty JR ends up doing, well, will likely be consistent with what we've seen in the past, which will probably be unfortunate. But hey, he has such a magnificent track record of success doing things his way, so who am I to argue!!

This decision on the next manager for the White Sox is a big one. They really need to make a statement this time around. This team has sunk to a fairly significant level of irrelevance as evidenced by attendance and TV ratings, not to mention on the national scene, that management needs to seriously address. No more warm & fuzzy former White Sox personnel. That ain't gonna cut it this time around. They need to go out and bring someone in who will represent and convey a completely new brand of White Sox baseball that we haven't seen in a while. It needs to be on the level of the Indians bringing in Francona, the Cubs bringing in Maddon, etc. Is Bud Black that guy? Maybe. He seems to fit that profile that I'm talking about. It should be someone with prior managerial experience, too. Sorry, but given where the team is at the moment, I don't think the timing is right to provide an on-the-job learning experience for guys like Alomar or Martinez. I just don't.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 07:28 PM) It didn't exist when the designs were being done for the new ballpark. True, although the Skydome opened (April 1989) before ground was even broken on the new Comiskey (May 1989). What did exist, however, were the same stadium design options given to the Orioles for the new Comiskey's design. O's ownership chose the Camden option; Reinsdorf & Co. the new Comiskey option. Reinsdorf would say years later when asked about all of this "They (the Orioles) got what they wanted. We got what we wanted." Ok, Jerry. And how did that work out for you!

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 06:37 PM) This is a moot point and you conveniently ignore the positive aspects of the design, stressing the worst aspects of it. You try to make a direct correlation between the design of the upper deck and attendance, but there is no evidence to support that conclusion. You are looking to blame the owner for something that took place 20 years ago which is in and of itself strange, because this owner brought us a World Series Championship and has spent a lot of money on players to field competitive teams. Is there anything that you like about Sox Park? There is a lot there to like if you look for it. As I said, I love going to games there with friends. We always have a good time even when we lose. We don't sit in our seats all game and b1tch about what Reinsdorf agreed to 20 years ago . We enjoy the moment and look forward to positive changes in the future. What does that have to do with the discussion at hand?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2016 -> 05:02 PM) Like an obese or elderly person would have no problem getting to the top row at Camden Yards. Again, when the park opened , it was cheaper to sit in the outfield. The worst case scenario in climbing to the last row of the upper deck at Camden Yards is to climb 17 rows at a 31 degree angle. That's because the Orioles ownership was smart and took the advice from the same architecture firm that built new Comiskey and built the opening of the deck in the middle of the deck, not at the base. Meanwhile, with the opening at the base of the upper deck at new Comiskey, to get to the last row there, you had to climb another 12 rows at the absurd 35 degree angle AFTER having already climbed 17 rows at the same slope. HUGE DIFFERENCE, Dick Allen. Huge difference in getting up and down the two decks. Pretty easy to understand why Sox fans rejected Comiskey's deck and why the Sox ultimately ended up lopping off those top eight rows, which was the team essentially acknowledging what we've been saying all along: they made a HUGE strategic blunder in allowing that architecturally flawed deck to be built in the first place.