Thad Bosley

QUOTE (BigFinn @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 06:53 PM) When Jerry and Eddie bought the team back in 1981, Bill Veeck was flirting with the idea of selling the Sox to the DeBartolo family. They were going to relocate the Sox to Tampa-St. Pete. So, thank you Eddie Einhorn (and Jerry Reinsdorf) for getting involved, buying the White Sox, and keeping the team in the South Side of Chicago. Rest in peace, Eddie. HUH?!?!? That is not true at all. There was absolutely ZERO discussion at that time of DeBartolo moving the team to Florida. None whatsoever, unless I missed something, in which case it would be helpful if you could produce a reliable source supporting this claim. What we do know is one party that did threaten such a move, and that of course was from the Jerry Reinsdorf/Eddie Einhorn regime back in the mid-to-late '80s.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 28, 2016 -> 10:51 AM) That is actually not true. It is when it gets irrational, repetitive, and obsessive. Literally all you post is about Sox management being horrible. Honestly Dick Allen and I have had major differences over the the years, and nothing about his posting has even approached what you give. He can at least give rationale and linear thoughts, and be involved in more than one discussion. Rational = evaluating actual results and facts, such as the Sox' record of performance. Irrational = casting baseless aspersions about an entire fan base. Irrational = making references to an organization's level of resources when you have no facts to support such references.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 28, 2016 -> 12:55 AM) The crown is all yours. Unfortunately for you and Dick Allen, what the two of you constitute as "moaning, complaining and whining" is only those instances where someone posts a point of view different than that of yours, and in particular, if it's even remotely critical of Sox management (oh god forbid!). I'm sure if someone got on here and savagely ripped the fan base like you do all the time, you wouldn't count that as moaning, complaining or whining whatsoever. Although now that I mention it, we don't see fan base bashing messages too often around here, mostly just from you. Wonder why that is!!

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 06:12 PM) I hate bumping old threads, but I also hate when posters rip a move with the benefit of hindsight. Thad, I got no beef with you, but you've been ripping Hahn quite a bit lately on the LaRoche & Melky moves. And based on the post above, it doesn't appear you were against the LaRoche signing at the time. In fact, I'd say you were mildly excited based on that "not too shabby!" comment. Ha! I just saw this. I have no problem whatsoever you bumping this up and reminding me of something I once said. No problem at all. In fact, just reading that post, I am reminded of course of the optimism I shared with most of you about those deals. And why were we excited and optimistic? Because we thought that FINALLY, after nearly ten years since the World Series, with only one brief (and unsuccessful) playoff appearance in-between, these particular moves represented a legitimate chance to reverse our fortunes and return the team to the postseason. And then 2015 happened. So let's take a moment here and talk about a fan's rights, i.e., a paying consumer's rights, when it comes to reacting to deals made by the team they follow, support, and with whom they invest time, energy, and money. A new acquisition will have three stages: before, during, and after. The before is at the time of acquisition, the during is when the player is playing during the season, and then the after is after the season is completed. We as paying fans are entitled to an opinion at all three stages - before, during, and after, based on what we know at those points in time. As it relates to Cabrera & LaRoche, I fully admit at the time of acquisition I was excited and hopeful they would perform at a level whose efforts collectively would elevate the team from the pitiful play of recent seasons to that of a playoff-worthy contender. You talk about bumping threads - there are a gazillion of them buried somewhere in this site of where I'm very clear about my desire for my team, these Sox of ours, to WIN, WIN, WIN. I am very tired of all of the losing seasons we've had to endure under this ownership/management team. And so even though I am critical of the owner and his management team, I nonetheless want the moves they make to work out. I wanted LaRoche to hit 30 home runs and knock in 100 runs. I wanted Melky to be a far better player than he was last year. These weren't moves I made, obviously, they were made by Hahn and Williams, but of course I supported them. Why? Because I want the team to win, and "on paper" they looked "not too shabby". I am similarly excited about Frazier "before" we head into this season as well, based "on paper" how it looks like he might contribute to whatever slim postseason aspirations this current roster has. Let's remember one important fact in all of this: we are not the ones paid the big bucks to come up with these deals and put together these teams year after year after year. We are simply the paying customers, some of whom, like myself, are results driven. The folks in the front office are purportedly greater baseball minds than any of us, which is fine, but then prove it. Construct rosters with players who together will produce an exciting team for our beleaguered fan base, one that actually gets to the postseason and actually goes deep into them, which has only occurred once in our lifetimes. If you get those players who make that happen, I'll be the very first one to applaud at the time of acquisition, "during" the season while the players are excelling at their craft, and "after" the season, "in hindsight", when we are celebrating a successful season. But until that happens, if management team's decisions continue to produce the results like we've seen the past decade, and if their major acquisitions like Cabrera, LaRoche and Garcia continue to produce like they did last year, I will certainly have something to say about that. Again, as customers like we all are who invest time, energy and money into this product, I think that's a privilege we all have to do so.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 11:04 PM) Yes.LMAO. Your post from last year was dug up for all to see. The whiner got exposed. LMAO! No one complains, whines, or moans more on this site than you. Not one person.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 10:55 PM) Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Without it, you like LaRoche, were hoping they would spend even more on Matt Kemp, and thought Abreu, Kemp, LaRoche, and Avi made a nice middle of the line up. Your complaining is a joke. If they listened to you, the payroll would be higher and the team worse. LMAO!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 01:28 PM) How much Is available? I agree they have some money to spend but that doesn't mean you spend it all. It has to make sense. Does giving Cespedes $30 million for 2016 and the option to walk away if he is good after one season , or be stuck paying him big money if he is a flop make sense? Does giving Alex Gordon at his age $100 million make sense? How how should they go with Fowler before it makes no sense? Sometimes spending money makes you money. Sometimes spending it foolishly means you won't have it when you need it. Great question, Dick Allen. When the team signed Belle to that record setting contract (at the time) for the combined $55M that it was, the team's net worth then was $144M. The team's net worth now is approximately $976M, and yet since that extraordinary explosion in wealth amassed by the ownership group, the largest contract they've handed out was the paltry (by comparison) one they gave to Abreu for $68M. That puts the Sox in the exclusive company of being the only team outside the friggin' A's and Pirates who have not offered a contract greater than $70M to anyone. Now it would be one thing if Reinsdorf & Co. could point to a track record of achievement and accomplishment to say "Hey, our way has worked!". But very sadly, they can do no such thing. The team hasn't won more than 90 games in a decade, and the last playoff appearance was eight years ago. The owners have gotten massively rich over the years, while meanwhile, we the fans have been treated to the delight of watching the likes of Dunn, LaRoche, Rios, Beckham, Flowers, Gillespie, etc. trying to ply their trade, with no postseason appearances remotely in sight. Money was spent foolishly on many unsuccessful second and third tier type players during the past ten years (don't forget the likes of Linebrink, Teahen, and Keppinger!). Perhaps it would be better spent on fewer yet far more talented ones going forward. It's not an approach the team has tried in the past, but given the horrid results of the approaches they have tried, it might be one worth looking into.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 07:09 PM) Which is exactly why this team shouldn't go throwing money around, just because. Ah, so you admit that throwing money at second tier free agents such as the contracts given Cabrera and LaRoche were mistakes by Hahn. It appears you are right about that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 07:08 PM) Picking out one contract from 20 years ago with no actual look at what revenues or anything else was is the only fallacy in this thread. It is quite literally making more stuff up to get mad about. Lol - I wish I had a greater population of contracts such as the one Belle signed from which to cite. That contract from 20 years ago marked the last time our "big market team" acted like a big market team in the market. And since that contract signing, our Sox have managed to make a meager THREE appearances in the postseason in the 19 years since. I know such stats are inconvenient for you and make you mad when they are brought up, SS2K5, but they remain the facts. Sox management doesn't compete the way a big market team ought, and the record sadly continues to reflect their lack of effort in that regard.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 01:28 PM) How much Is available? I agree they have some money to spend but that doesn't mean you spend it all. It has to make sense. Does giving Cespedes $30 million for 2016 and the option to walk away if he is good after one season , or be stuck paying him big money if he is a flop make sense? Does giving Alex Gordon at his age $100 million make sense? How how should they go with Fowler before it makes no sense? Sometimes spending money makes you money. Sometimes spending it foolishly means you won't have it when you need it. You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 01:00 PM) lol. Payroll is triple now, what it was then. But now we are cheap? What? This is a real stretch, even for you. Lol - I didn't say we were cheap. Those are your words, not mine. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of suggestions the Sox are operating under "limited resources" at the moment. They are not, not by a long shot.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 27, 2016 -> 12:23 PM) Their payroll was $45.7 million versus somewhere around $125 million today. Correct, that was their payroll in 1996 - which was fifth highest in baseball at that time. But with the same crappy attendance in '96 as in '15, they went out and signed the largest contract in the history of the game at the time. So what revenue stream existed then that apparently is not present today, that limits the team now to a middle-of-the-pack payroll of $125M?

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 09:07 PM) Belle's deal was the largest in baseball history at the time and stunned the other owners. The media speculation at the time was that JR deliberately made it higher than it should have been to "pay back" the other owners for settling the labor situation of 1994-95 which wasn't to his liking. Whatever the reason or reasons it cost him a position on the Labor Advisory Committee that gave recommendations to the commissioner. He was removed from it by the other owners shortly afterwards. Mark For the "Boo hoo, the Sox just lack the resources to compete for premium free agent talent" crowd, it's worthy to note that the Sox drew fewer people in the season (1996) prior to signing Belle than the Sox drew last year. Yet the Sox magically had the resources then to go ahead and offer that then-largest contract in baseball history. And the last I looked, that contract never came close to crippling the organization financially. So this nonsense that this team with all of the extra TV money it has now that it didn't have back when they signed Belle is somehow now "out of cash" and operating with "limited resources" is just that - nonsense.

QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 09:07 PM) Belle's deal was the largest in baseball history at the time and stunned the other owners. The media speculation at the time was that JR deliberately made it higher than it should have been to "pay back" the other owners for settling the labor situation of 1994-95 which wasn't to his liking. Whatever the reason or reasons it cost him a position on the Labor Advisory Committee that gave recommendations to the commissioner. He was removed from it by the other owners shortly afterwards. Mark Sigh...if only Mr. Reinsdorf was in a snit with his fellow owners this offseason when Cespedes, Upton, and Gordon were available...

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 05:49 PM) Things are finally heating up for Jackson. The Halos made an offer, Cleveland just lost their CF, Baltimore took a big one up the chili-hole from Fowler and the Sox are still looking for an outfielder. Are they really, though? They've only had a handful of quality ones dancing in front of their nose for the past few months, there for the taking, and nuttin'!

QUOTE (captain54 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 12:31 PM) The powers that be (billionaire investors accustomed to juicy dividend checks) opened the checkbook post 2005 and the FO couldn't make it happen… 3 Playoff appearances in 16 yrs… rather than "stupid or negligent". . how about just "ineffective" ? Now, now - don't be too critical. We've actually had it pretty good these past 16 years. Consider what your parents and grandparents were treated to in the 39 years prior - just two playoff appearances! Two playoff appearances between 1960 and 1999. And some wonder why we don't have a larger, more blindly loyal fan base today!!

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 02:09 PM) They are under contract for 4 more years. What do you think their not going to play up to their ability or demand a trade or what? If the team is not competitive they will be playing for their next FA contract after the 2019 season or if they demand a trade the Sox will receive a haul back that would have to be a nice blend of near/Major League bats and prospects. With Sale, it's certainly a possibility, if not a probability. He's entering his 7th season with the club, and at some point probably sooner rather than later, if the next season or two continue to look like his first six, he very well could demand a trade. The guy was very clear - he wants to win!

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) Our window of opportunity is not closing nearly as fast as you think it is. We have our core of Sale, Quintana, Rodon, Abreu and Eaton all locked up for the next four years (with Eaton, Quintana and Rodon locked up longer). We also have Anderson and Fulmer waiting in the wings who should make their presence know in 2017 or late 2016 along with other solid prospects such as Tyler Danish, Spencer Adams and Trey Michalczewski all just a couple years away. We also have two draft picks within the first 27 this year and three total in the first two rounds so our minors should be getting stockpiled pretty quickly. The organization as a whole is in a pretty good spot right now and are setting themselves up well to compete for the next half decade or so. The biggest thing the Sox going for them is that they have zero bad franchise crippling contracts on the books. Sure LaRoche, Danks and Cabrera are overpaid for what they are now but they are all short term contracts. You make a lot of great points. The only thing I'd say to you is that Chris Sale is probably not all that interested in the team being competitive towards the end of his current contract. He actually made the comment the other day that he has yet to play in a "meaningful game" in his entire career. That's a pretty strong statement to make, and is obviously indicative of where his mind is at in terms of the team competing sooner rather than later. He actually went on further to say that it's all about making the playoffs, with anything less unacceptable. So at this point, for guys like Sale and Abreu, they might not be too interested in looking at this as a long term project, waiting for the likes of the Adams, Danish' and Michalczewskis to come along before the team is competitive once again.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Feb 24, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) So guessing Sox were in the 2 years/$20M range. The Sox 0-4 now this offseason waiting for the market for free agent outfielders to fall to them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 08:10 PM) Hopefully Hahn and KW and JR prove to be correct

QUOTE (shakes @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 08:32 PM) But it is false. Given what we know about spending relative to market size, attendance, and revenue the Sox spend pretty favorably compared to the majority of MLB teams. Blaming it on 'the owners are cheap', and should sell the team, is just regurgitating a lazy argument to whine that the front office didn't do what you think it should have done. They ought to sell the team because they have been utter failures as owners, no matter how much they've spent. There's absolutely nothing lazy about looking at the record of achievement, or lack thereof, to guide one to that conclusion.

QUOTE (Baron @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 06:49 PM) Everything's fine. Why upgrade one of the worst defensive OFs in baseball? "One of the worst"? Is there a worse defensive OF in all of baseball all the way around than our's right now?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 01:02 PM) I don't see a specific player named. No, in his response to the Sox' stance on the "free agent outfielders", he didn't mention each of their names separately, but instead referred to them collectively as "these players", and obviously he was referring to Cespedes, Gordon and Upton. Unless you think he was talking about different players in the context of "these players" when he was specifically asked about the free agent outfielders who had signed at the time of Soxfest.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 11:36 AM) I know others will try to over simplify things, but I am used to that. It is one thing to get a specific expenditure for a top flight guy approved. It is quite another to get it for a second or third tier player. All you have to do is look a the players they are bringing in and the deals they are being brought in at to get that there are pretty obvious limitations they are looking at. If they had easily available money to spend on these guys, they would have done it long ago. I also think fans are conflagrating team statements, with rumors that don't necessarily reflect what the team is actually able to do. I have no doubt that a large chunk of the Sox being connected to players was being done on behalf of agents and players, and probably didn't reflect any real ability to have a fiscal interest in players. Not all rumors are created equal. All the White Sox themselves have said is that they are still trying to improve this team. They have never said they were interested in specific players or specific budgets had been set. Some fans are seeing what they want to see, and that is the worst case scenario. The fact that they are still looking, while useful players are sitting out there tells me everything that I need to know. The most negative will take it as the teams management is either stupid or negligent. I think that is just silly. Well yeah they did, actually, at least after the fact. Consider Rick Hahn's comments on the first night of Soxfest when specifically asked about the three premium free agent outfielders: “Let me make something really clear: There is absolutely no hardline, dogma, limit on contract terms with free agents. The reason we didn’t sign any of the hitters that thus far have signed elsewhere at the end of the day is not about contract term limitations. We had numerous conversations, with various parameters, various structures, right up until the day or the day before these players wound up choosing their ultimate destinations.” I wouldn't call that fans seeing what they want to see at all.

My one and only concern about the possibility of Rollins being the starting shortstop this season is if he plays defense the way he did last season. He was a below average defender last year, and that's the last thing this team needs is another position clocking in defensively at below average. As of right now, the outfield defense is a disaster, particularly on the corners as we all know, and remember - in the process of upgrading the offense this offseason at second and catcher, we actually took a hit on the defensive side of things. The moves to upgrade those two positions were the right ones, given the team was dead last in offense. But you add a Rollins who may be in decline defensively, and then all of a sudden you are seeing a downgrade up the middle defensively from catcher to short to second, and this for a team that finished near the bottom in defense last season. Add that to the outfield corner defense, and it's rather frightening, to say the least! So in all of these discussions about what Rollins may or may not have left in the tank, let's hope what's left is a return to form of the fine defender he was just two seasons ago!